#15 - Studies of brain lateralization in animals have

[aslayton1]

Can someone please explain to me why the correct answer is D?

Thank you!

[aslayton1]

Lesson 1 pg. 1-2.

Thanks so much

[Adam Tyson]

I thought that might be the one you meant, except that the correct answer to this weaken question is actually E, not D (which may be why you were having a hard time figuring out how to make D work!)

The idea here is that since humans are predominantly righties, and since it's us humans that teach dogs to shake, we teach them to shake with the right paw. Their shaking with the right is not an indication that they are predominantly right-handed, but that we are. That is the best argument of the bunch against the trained dog example in the stimulus.

Hope that cleared things up!

Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT Instructor

[biskam]

and D doesn't work because their ability to learn to use either paw after the fact doesn't address whether they were right-pawed in the first place? also, it doesn't directly address the situation of dogs shaking paws with their right paw, whereas e the correct answer does?

Thanks!

[nicholaspavic]

Hi biskam,

That is exactly why Answer Option (D) is not correct. Well done and keep up the good work!

[cmorris32]

Hi PowerScore!

I have a couple of questions about this stimulus.

First, I just want to be sure that I understand what this question stem is precisely asking... I answered E correctly, but I want to double-check that I understand the question stem, as I feel it is a bit confusing! Here is what I got from the question stem: I am looking for an answer choice that will weaken the counterexample of the fact that dogs almost always shake hands with their right paw. Is this correct?

Second, based on the way I reasoned this question, answer choice E is correct because it gives an alternate explanation as to why dogs shake hands with their right paw, which is one of the ways in which I can weaken a causal argument. Is this correct?

Third, is it correct to say that the reasons below are the reasons why A-D are incorrect?
Answer choice A has no effect on the counterexample and therefore does not weaken it.
Answer choice B is irrelevant.
Answer choice C is irrelevant to the conversation of dogs' right-handedness and left-handedness.
Answer choice D is irrelevant to the argument.

Thank you!
Caroline

[knallira]

Hello. This is my first time using the forum, so I am not sure if I can ask for help with this question or not. I was wondering if I could get help determining what the prephrase would be for sample problem #1 from lesson 1, on page 2 from my test preparation book I was sent. Thank you.

[Luke Haqq]

Hi Caroline,

The response to all of your questions is yes! You first ask,

Here is what I got from the question stem: I am looking for an answer choice that will weaken the counterexample of the fact that dogs almost always shake hands with their right paw. Is this correct?

This correctly summarizes the question stem. There is cause and effect reasoning in the stimulus, and the question stem asks you to weaken that causal reasoning.

To your second question,

Second, based on the way I reasoned this question, answer choice E is correct because it gives an alternate explanation as to why dogs shake hands with their right paw, which is one of the ways in which I can weaken a causal argument. Is this correct?

Yes, an alternative explanation is definitely one way of weakening causal reasoning. Other ways of weakening causal reasoning include showing the presence of the cause without the effect, the effect without the cause, or a reversed cause and effect relationship.

To your questions about each incorrect answer choice, yes, your reasoning is correct--the information is either entirely irrelevant or it has no effect on the causal relationship at all.

Keep up the good work!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi knallira,

I can certainly address your question about prephrasing.

You describe your question as being about "determining what the prephrase would be" for this question (which is also the sample problem on page 1-2 to which you reference). Given the way you phrased the question, it seems important to note that there isn't necessarily one correct prephrase. Rather, prephrasing is a technique that helps the test taker be more engaged, anticipate what the right answer choice might be, and be less likely to fall for incorrect answers. For more on prephrasing, see page 1-9 of your lesson book. It's described there as a method for "quickly speculating on what you expect the answer choice to be."

That being said, I can explain how I might have approached prephrasing this question. The stimulus involves cause and effect reasoning--namely, given the fact that dogs shake will almost always shake with their right paw, this is taken to be the effect caused by dogs actually being right-handed. This is why the stimulus reaches the conclusion that prior findings (about animals being roughly 50% left-handed and 50% right-handed) are "suspect" findings. The question stem then asks us to weaken this conclusion that such prior findings are suspect.

To me, a prephrasing would take note of the fact that the conclusion and question stem are specifically about dogs. Since it's asking about a domesticated animal, my intuition is that a dog's behavior might be affected by the behaviors of the humans that the dog lives with. Since we're given information about human handedness (i.e., mainly being right-handed), perhaps most dogs are being taught to shake hands by owners who themselves are right-handed. With that paraphrasing in hand, answer choice (E) stands out as the strongest answer choice: "In learning to perform tricks, dogs are influenced by the behavior of their trainers." This answer choice is very similar to the prephrasing--it makes a connection between human handedness and dog handedness.

[Coleman]

I'm having trouble with the wording of the stimulus.
It is asking which one is "the strongest defense against the counterexample of dogs that 'shake hands'?"

Do 'the dogs shake hands' per se have to be counterexample in this context in comparison to the other dogs that precisely diverged 50/50 in their left/right-handedness? Because it seems like that is the case, but still not clear in my mind, and I'm not sure if I could get this correct again especially under time constraint on the test day. So I'm asking more precise answer.
Initially, I thought the question is asking us to look for the counterexample against the 'the dogs that shake hands'?

If I say 'counterexample of something', does this wording necessarily indicate that something is a counterexample by itself or should I find a counterexample that refutes the idea of something?

Thanks in advance!