Survey/Study

[kcho10]

Hello,

I see a lot of questions about surveys and studies in logical reasoning. In many cases, the survey is questioned in the answer choices. However, I came across a case where the study seemed to be assumed correct. For PT 62 Section 4 # 24, the stimulus states that there is conflicting data: the data from the arthiritis study suggests that there is no correlation whereas the sufferers in the study claim there is a correlation. But the correct answer C seems to suggest that the study should be given more validity.

How can we determine when a survey/study is valid? We don't know anything about how the study is conducted in this case. Is it reasonable to assume that whenever the method is not described, the study should be considered valid? based on my experience, it seems like the studies would only be questioned when the method stated in the stimulus was flawed.

Thank you

[Jennifer Janowsky]

kcho10,

You are correct. Unless there seems to be something in the stimulus which brings into question the validity of the study, you don't have to assume it to be flawed. In this case, there is reasoning that seems to show the arthritis sufferers who felt a correlation were instead mistaken:

"Those arthritis sufferers in the study who were convinced of the existence of such a correlation gave widely varying accounts of the time delay between the occurrence of what they believed to be the relevant feature of the weather and the increased intensity of the pain."

This part of the stimulus hints that the intensity of their pain was not correlated with the weather, but rather occurred more randomly than they thought. For this reason, the study's results are assumed to be more valid and the experiences of the arthritis sufferers. Answer C is selected because it suggests that the results of the study are correct.

In situations where there is a study, you do not have to assume the study is invalid unless some information paints it that way. If the methods were described in a way that made them seem biased or flawed, that would be different. But in this case, we are simply comparing experiences of the sufferers to the results of the study, not attacking the study itself.

Great question, I hope this is helpful!