Confusing resolve the paradox question

[elbism]

Hello!

Okay, so here is the question:

Based upon studies conducted over the last two decades that show head injuries can be reduced if children wear bicycle helmets, some jurisdictions have passed laws requiring that children under the age of 12 wear helmets when they ride their bicycles. - Even though a large number of children do wear bicycle helmets, more head injuries than expected are continuing to occur. And this is the result even though the studies have shown that the wearing a helmet reduces the incidence of head injuries.

Then it asks "which one of the following statements, if true, might suitably explain the unexpected finding"

So after reading the powerscore LR bible cover to cover i instinctively looked for the answer that suggested that accidents related to bicycles had gone up over all, meaning that whilst children wearing helmets had increased, so had the number of children riding bicycles overall increased, meaning the ones not wearing helmets also increased - which would account for the findings. Proving my assumption further, the stimulus states "Even though a large number of children do wear bicycle helmets, more head injuries than expected are continuing to occur" but does NOT state that injuries are continuing to occur to the children who are wearing the helmet! so from this we can safely assume that even though the number of helmet wearers has gone up, the number of head injuries have been the product of the increasing number of those who do not wear them.

so i found this answer
(b) "more children are riding bicycles now than before bicycle helmets were introduced"

This seemed to fit in with my assumption and if it were true, would make sense. If more children are riding bicycles now and the rate of growth of children riding bicycles without helmets exceeds those riding bicycles with helmets then it would account for the discrepancy between the findings and the expectations

However this was incorrect.The correct answer was
(E)"bicycle helmets do not work properly if they are not properly secured with the chin strap, and many children and their parents do not secure the chin strap properly"

I understand why E is correct so i don't need an explanation for that, however i do need an explanation for why b is not correct as i would've kept both of these 2 as contenders and more than likely gone with B. In fact I did. Thank you

[Robert Carroll]

elbism,

Can you tell me which test (month and year), section, and question number this is from? If you don't know, can you tell me where you found it? Thanks!

Robert Carroll

[elbism]

Unfortunately I don't know, I download an app called 'lsat prep' on my iphone, and this was one of the questions in a 'logic' section.
Alternatively you can see it here in an ebook preview

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=wOc ... ts&f=false

It's question 14. I'm not sure if that helps? thanks!

[Robert Carroll]

elbism,

I can't find that particular question in any of the official tests - if you can find such a source, let us know! Because it may not be an official question, I'm hesitant to answer. Generally speaking, I would try to stick to official questions because you know if LSAC used the questions in the past, they meet the same standards you'll see on future questions on the actual test you take. For instance, as we discussed in the other thread, "or" has a consistent meaning across official LSATs, which is more precise than its meaning when we carelessly use it in everyday conversation - it means "one or the other or both". There's no guarantee that an unofficial question will meet those same standards of precision, so it's potentially problematic for your studying to get into the habit of answering a question that LSAC may have had a different view about, if they had written it.

I hope this helps!

Robert Carroll

[elbism]

Thank you, I wasn't aware that some published questions were not official questions. Will definitely avoid that in the future!

[Dave Killoran]

Hey Elbism,

Let me take a moment to follow up on Robert's excellent point. The question you posted is not an LSAT question, and it's a question produced by the author of one of the LSAT prep books out there. We're always super hesitant to answer questions about another company's materials and homemade questions, and this is a good example of why. The construction of this question is pretty weak, and it features non-LSAT conforming language. Based on what I'm seeing here, I'd recommend maybe dropping this particular app out of your arsenal—questions like this are going to cause more confusion than they resolve!

I hope that helps. Thanks!

[Dave Killoran]

Thank you, I wasn't aware that some published questions were not official questions. Will definitely avoid that in the future!

It's tough to know! Usually, if something is free, then the questions won't be official LSAT questions. For a company to use actual LSAT questions from released tests, we have to pay a licensing fee for every use. Also, you can look for the LSAC question usage notice (like a copyright page), which will appear in any book that features real questions.

[elbism]

Hey Elbism,

Let me take a moment to follow up on Robert's excellent point. The question you posted is not an LSAT question, and it's a question produced by the author of one of the LSAT prep books out there. We're always super hesitant to answer questions about another company's materials and homemade questions, and this is a good example of why. The construction of this question is pretty weak, and it features non-LSAT conforming language. Based on what I'm seeing here, I'd recommend maybe dropping this particular app out of your arsenal—questions like this are going to cause more confusion than they resolve!

I hope that helps. Thanks!

That would've completely thrown me off on the test! I wonder if I could use my future shiny ESQ. title to sue them?
Of course I wouldn't be esq. in that instance
Anyway... Although you are hesitant to respond, can we assume still that the number of children bike riding in general increasing would potentially be in line with resolving the paradox? OR at least a paradox of that nature? I just don't want to be thrown so completely by this question that I screw up a v. similar one on the actual LSAT. Because this was actually my prephrased answer before I checked the answers.

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hi elbism,

Well, of course if the number of children who ride bicycles goes up, it would be reasonable to expect that the number of head injuries will also increase, even if more children are adopting the advice of wearing a helmet. The latter may lower the risk of injury (i.e. the percentage of children who sustain an injury), but the absolute number of injuries can still go up if substantially more children engage in the activity whose risk is being assessed.

This question illustrates why you shouldn't use non-licensed LSAT materials, particularly if they are of dubious quality and origin. The author of the question left a lot unclear, which is partly why you got confused. While test makers often use convoluted language to obfuscate simple ideas, they will never purposefully inject factual ambiguities into their stimuli (as the author did here).

Hope this helps a bit!

[Jon Denning]

I feel compelled in reading this thread (and that lousy fake question) to echo Nikki's last point: steer well clear of anything that's meant to look like a real LSAT question but isn't from an officially-administered test.

That app or book you're using with simulated content in it? Delete and/or burn it. It's almost certainly going to cause more confusion and create more bad habits (and false expectations) than it's ever going to help you. This is one of those situations, like third-world skydiving, where "most affordable" should worry you.

Spend a little more to get materials, or even a full course, that exclusively uses real questions—you'll be glad you did. And if you're feeling particularly noble (or perhaps a bit chastened) encourage others in your position to do the same