- Wed Jun 12, 2024 12:53 pm
#106931
Hi valentina,
Answer E tells us that out of 100 children, several of those children who had slept with night-lights as infants were nearsighted. Are these results good, bad, or do we have any idea? The fact that several of these children are nearsighted tells us nothing in and of itself. Perhaps several the children who didn't sleep with night-lights as children are also nearsighted; we don't know based on this information.
The important thing to understand is that the argument is not claiming that night-lights are the only cause of nearsightedness, so the fact that a few of the kids who had slept with night-lights are nearsighted really tells us nothing by itself; it could be complete coincidence.
What would be needed for Answer E to weaken the argument would be show a properly conducted study in which a statistically meaningful difference was found between older children who had slept with night-lights being more likely to be nearsighted than those who did not.
Answer D, on the other hand, attacks the very studies that the argument relies on to draw its conclusion that the effect disappears with age.
