- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8916
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:00 am
#73116
Complete Question Explanation
Must Be True-FIB. The correct answer choice is (A).
As with most questions that involve filling in a blank in the stimulus, this question requires that we draw a reasonable inference based on the facts presented. In other words, it is a Must Be True question (and since the stem uses qualifying language - "most logically completes the argument" - we can think of this as a softer variant of Must Be True, a Most Strongly Supported question.) Our task is to review the facts presented and draw a conclusion from them.
The premises are that people who don't yet know how their condition will be treated (surgery vs. something else) experience less pain than those who know what's coming, and that the uncertainty in the first group is more stressful than knowing what treatment lies ahead. That second premise is an explicit assumption made by the author. Putting these premises together, we have a correlation between uncertainty, stress, and pain - as uncertainty increases, stress increases, and as stress increases, pain, somewhat surprisingly, decreases. What sort of conclusion might we draw from this evidence? That there is at least some connection, perhaps a causal one, between increased stress and decreased pain. More stress may actually cause a reduction in pain, which seems counter-intuitive.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. While the stimulus certainly does not prove that stress causes a reduction in pain, it does suggest that possibility, and that is the inference that we drew. Remember that we can accept something less than total proof, as the question stem fits a Most Strongly Supported model. Since this matches our prephrase, then as surprising as it might sound and as hard as it might be to believe, it must be a contender as you move to the other answer choices.
Answer choice (B): The is no evidence that pain is beneficial, at least not in this stimulus. Stress seems to have a benefit in the form of reduced pain, but we can draw no inferences about what pain may or may not cause.
Answer choice (C): Answer C appeals to our intuition, but is not supported by the facts, which indicate that as least as far as pain levels go, a lack of information might actually have some positive impact on these patients. Also note that this answer is about actively withholding information, while our stimulus is only about patients who don't yet know what lies in store for them, perhaps because their doctors still haven't determined the best course of action.
Answer choice (D): All the patients in the stimulus have reduced blood flow to their hearts, but some have more stress than others, so there is no reason to conclude that stress is either an effect or a cause of their health problems. It appears that stress may be caused not by reduced blood flow, but by knowing how you will be treated for that problem.
Answer choice (E): The stimulus gives us no statistical data to compare the rate of surgery to the incidence of pain experienced by the patients awaiting treatment. No inference can be drawn about which group is more likely to require surgery for their condition.
Must Be True-FIB. The correct answer choice is (A).
As with most questions that involve filling in a blank in the stimulus, this question requires that we draw a reasonable inference based on the facts presented. In other words, it is a Must Be True question (and since the stem uses qualifying language - "most logically completes the argument" - we can think of this as a softer variant of Must Be True, a Most Strongly Supported question.) Our task is to review the facts presented and draw a conclusion from them.
The premises are that people who don't yet know how their condition will be treated (surgery vs. something else) experience less pain than those who know what's coming, and that the uncertainty in the first group is more stressful than knowing what treatment lies ahead. That second premise is an explicit assumption made by the author. Putting these premises together, we have a correlation between uncertainty, stress, and pain - as uncertainty increases, stress increases, and as stress increases, pain, somewhat surprisingly, decreases. What sort of conclusion might we draw from this evidence? That there is at least some connection, perhaps a causal one, between increased stress and decreased pain. More stress may actually cause a reduction in pain, which seems counter-intuitive.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. While the stimulus certainly does not prove that stress causes a reduction in pain, it does suggest that possibility, and that is the inference that we drew. Remember that we can accept something less than total proof, as the question stem fits a Most Strongly Supported model. Since this matches our prephrase, then as surprising as it might sound and as hard as it might be to believe, it must be a contender as you move to the other answer choices.
Answer choice (B): The is no evidence that pain is beneficial, at least not in this stimulus. Stress seems to have a benefit in the form of reduced pain, but we can draw no inferences about what pain may or may not cause.
Answer choice (C): Answer C appeals to our intuition, but is not supported by the facts, which indicate that as least as far as pain levels go, a lack of information might actually have some positive impact on these patients. Also note that this answer is about actively withholding information, while our stimulus is only about patients who don't yet know what lies in store for them, perhaps because their doctors still haven't determined the best course of action.
Answer choice (D): All the patients in the stimulus have reduced blood flow to their hearts, but some have more stress than others, so there is no reason to conclude that stress is either an effect or a cause of their health problems. It appears that stress may be caused not by reduced blood flow, but by knowing how you will be treated for that problem.
Answer choice (E): The stimulus gives us no statistical data to compare the rate of surgery to the incidence of pain experienced by the patients awaiting treatment. No inference can be drawn about which group is more likely to require surgery for their condition.
