LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 8917
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#35173
Complete Question Explanation

Strengthen, CE. The correct answer choice is (A)

Here, the author draws a conclusion about male guppy courting behavior. In a study of guppy fish,
researchers observed male guppies that had more orange on one side of their body than on the other.
These fish were permitted to show whichever side they preferred to the female guppies. It turns
out that the males were more likely to show their orange side to the females when courting. The
researchers also observed that the females were drawn to the males showing more orange. From
this evidence, the author concludes that “a male guppy will alter its courting patterns in response to
feedback from a female guppy.”

The author’s conclusion is causal, but there is no evidence to support the view that the male guppies
showed more orange in response to any feedback from the female guppies. All we know is that the
female guppies were drawn to the male guppies showing more orange. While the evidence certainly
establishes the existence of a correlation, it does not support the definitive causal conclusion reached
by the author.

The question identifies this as a Strengthen question. Our prephrase is that the correct answer choice
will provide evidence of an actual causal relationship between the female guppies being drawn to the
males showing more orange and the male guppies choosing to show the female guppies more orange.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Essentially, it tells us that when the
purported cause (i.e., the female guppies being drawn to the male guppies showing more orange)
was removed, then the effect was missing as well. This is evidence of regularity that is necessary to
establish a definitive causal relationship (i.e., when the cause is present the effect occurs, and when
the cause is absent the effect does not occur).

Answer choice (B): The preferences of females of other species is irrelevant to the conclusion of this
argument about guppies.

Answer choice (C): The comparative rate at which male guppies father offspring is not relevant to
the issue of whether the female’s apparent expression of preference causes the male guppies to show
more orange.

Answer choice (D): This answer choice is incorrect because the key information about the female
guppies was their action in giving feedback, not their coloring.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice tends to weaken the conclusion, because it restricts the extent
to which the female guppies were able to provide feedback to the male guppies.
 lsatlearner
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: Nov 04, 2014
|
#17581
Hi, I'm struggling to understand the correct answer to this question.

I think the conclusion of the argument is in the first sentence: "A study of guppy fish shows that a male guppy will alter its courting patterns in response to feedback from a female guppy."

The stimulus then gives evidence for this conclusion. What I don't understand is how answer choice A strengthens the argument. I think A is trying to show that when the female model was used, the model didn't respond to the more orange male guppies, so the male guppies didn't behave in a way to show their orange side. Is this correct?

Doesn't A have the implicit assumption that the female model didn't show any preference to the orange side of the males? If it were really a model, wouldn't it behave the same as a real female? Or am I over-analyzing this?

Also, why is answer choice E wrong? I thought that answer choice E ruled out an alternative explanation for the guppies behavior. If answer choice E were true, then we would know it wasn't scent or something else being given off by the male guppy that was influencing the female. We would know it was merely the visual stuff that affected the behavior, since the guppies couldn't physically interact.

:hmm:
Please help!
 lsatlearner
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: Nov 04, 2014
|
#17623
This is the guppy question from June 2014, the second LR section, #8. Any input is much appreciated!
 Elizabeth Mulkey
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 10
  • Joined: Oct 02, 2012
|
#17626
Hi Lsatlearner,

Your intuition on answer choice A ("I think A is trying to show that when the female model was used, the model didn't respond to the more orange male guppies, so the male guppies didn't behave in a way to show their orange side") is correct. The conclusion is about the male guppies changing their behavior in response to feedback from the female guppies. When the males saw a model of a female guppy, rather than an actual female guppy, the did not change their behavior.

Answer choice A strengthens the conclusion because it strengthens the relationship between the cause (female guppy feedback) and the effect (male guppies altering their behavior). Answer choice A eliminates one potential alternate explanation - that maybe it was the appearance of a female guppy, not her feedback, that made the male guppies alter their behavior. It seems like the answer choice is using the word "model" to mean something like "decoy." The model is not providing any feedback to the male guppies, which allows for a test of the "males change their behavior in response to female feedback" hypothesis.

As to answer choice E, it doesn't really do much for the conclusion. Maybe there are other ways female guppies provide feedback - scent, like you suggest, could be a form of feedback. The conclusion doesn't limit the feedback to visual cues, so answer choice E does not eliminate another possible explanation for the male guppies' behavior. Hope this helps!

- Elizabeth
 nihals23
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: Oct 01, 2018
|
#59186
Hi PS! I completely understood what you guys explained. Thanks for that! Can we show causal reasoning here in this way C(feedback from female guppy) --> E(alter its courting patterns i.e. show more orange). Now since the cause is removed when a dummy is placed, the male guppy did not show their orange side. Hence, this ALSO shows that when cause is removed, effect does not occur. My point being, the CE theory can be applied to the last sentence as well as the first sentence. Please help me determine if this is a correct way of deciphering this question. Many thanks!
 Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1787
  • Joined: Dec 06, 2013
|
#60959
nihals,

That is perfectly true and a fine way to evaluate this. If the model could not provide the feedback, the cause is missing. If the effect is also missing in that case, that strengthens the connection. Good work!

Robert Carroll

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.