#21 - A good way to get over one’s fear of an activity one

[tjvan]

Hi, could you help me answer a specific LR question?

On Test 52 Section 3 #21, I can't see why A is not the correct answer as opposed to the correct answer E (parachuting as a feared activity).

Thank you!
-Jan

[Steve Stein]

Hey Jan,

Thanks for your message (it would be helpful if you limited your questions to one per post--thanks!).

As for your first question, the author concludes that one should take part in scary activities to get over the fear of them. To prove this, the author tells us that about half the people who have skydived once still find the activity frightening, and among those who have gone ten or more times, only 1% say they are frightened.

The problem with this argument is that among those that have gone ten or more times, it seems we might have many more people who enjoy the activity than are scared by it. This is what correct answer choice E provides--the author doesn't appear to consider the fact that those who have gone ten or more times might not have had the fear to begin with.

Incorrect Answer choice A claims that the author presumes that taking part in more various scary activities will decrease one's fear of any one of the scary activities. The author does not make this argument--rather, the author's claim is that with regard to one specific activity, a good way to get over one's fear is to take part in that activity.

Let me know if this clears that one up--thanks!

~Steve

[tjvan]

Great, thanks so much! Your responses cleared up the confusion perfectly. Sorry about the multiple posts, too. I'll separate the questions from now on.

[LSAT2018]

Would this be a numbers and percentage type question? I was thinking it is a percentage versus percentage comparison that makes the stimulus faulty.

[Shannon Parker]

Yes. it is a faulty use of numbers/percentages. The stimulus talks about over half of people who have parachuted once, versus "less than 1 percent of those who have parachuted ten times," without taking into account the difference in the two groups. A correct comparison would have been how many first time parachutists were frightened, versus how many ten time parachutists that were frightened the first time are still frightened when they parachute.

Hope this helps.

[kcho10]

I don't understand why B is incorrect. If people who parachuted 5 times had an even lower percentage of people who reported fear, wouldn't that weaken the argument?

I'm beginning to think that the issue is with the term 'repeatedly', which is vague and doesn't imply anything about the actual number. By 'repeatedly' we are unsure whether the author is talking about 2 times or 3 times, etc.

Is this correct reasoning? Thank you

[Adam Tyson]

The problem with answer B, kcho10, is that we don't have any reason to believe that considering those folks in between will tell us anything more, and doing so isn't necessary to make the argument valid. Maybe we would find a weakness, or maybe we would find a strength, or maybe we would find out nothing of any import.

The real issue here is, in my opinion, one of cause and effect. The author argues that doing something repeatedly causes less fear, and his evidence is a correlation between those who do something just once (over 50% fear rate) with others who did it a lot (less than 1% fear rate). The problem is failing to consider that the cause and effect may in fact be reversed - being afraid may have caused some people to never do it again, while not being afraid may have caused others to keep doing it! Fear, or the lack thereof, may be the cause rather then the effect of repeated jumps!

While it might be interesting and informative to look at folks in-between, it isn't necessary, so failing to do so is not a flaw. Failing to consider alternate explanations for the reported correlation IS necessary, however, and so failing to consider those IS a flaw!