#12 - A study found that most of the strokes diagnosed by

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[JurisBlonde]

Hello,

I am really not understanding this question!!! I originally selected D as my answer. I selected this answer because I thought that if the strokes that occur on the right side of the brain have different symptoms, maybe that's why they are undiagnosed?

While going over my practice test I noticed that the correct answer is B. This does not make any sense! Why would it matter that just as many strokes occur on the right side than on the left side? How would that complete the passage? Thank you .

[Brook Miscoski]

JurisBlonde,

When you approach a fill-in-the-blank question, you need to determine what part of the argument needs to be supplied (for example, a premise or a conclusion). In this case, the question stem asks you to strengthen the passage by completing it, so we know that we need to find an additional premise.

The stimulus tells us that diagnosed strokes are mostly left-side strokes, and concludes that right-side strokes are less likely to be diagnosed. The answer will explain why we can reach that conclusion.

(B) says that strokes are about as common on the left side as on the right side. That would explain the conclusion that right-side strokes aren't being diagnosed. Put differently, if strokes are equally common on the left and right side, but the diagnoses are of left-side strokes, that means we're missing diagnosis of the right side strokes.

(D) draws a difference between right side and left side strokes without offering any support for the conclusion that right side strokes are not diagnosed as frequently as they occur. Just because the symptoms are missing doesn't mean that the doctors are failing to diagnose right-side strokes.

[mkarimi73]

I have several questions here that are more general in nature, so that I can be better prepared for a similar type of question, if I (or others) ever encounter one in the future. (I will note that I got this question right purely by sniffing what the test-makers would probably put here: A comparative statement to support a comparative conclusion.) However, I am having trouble understanding the concepts they are testing on this particular question.

1. Is this a Strengthen question? Or a Sufficient Assumption question? Based on the wording of the question, I assumed the former when taking the test.

2. When the test-makers talk about "likelihood" or "probabilities" or "comparative/relative statements", should I caution myself when choosing an answer choice that has an absolute statement to strengthen a comparative conclusion? What are the test-makers testing here for us to learn as future lawyers?

3. In regards to this particular stimulus, how can one conclude a comparative/relative conclusion based on a study that happened in the past? Is that what answer choice (B) is trying to do? Connect the study's findings to then conclude a comparative statement about likelihood in the future?

4. Are "comparative" statements the same thing as "relative" statements?

Thanks in advance. I apologize for the numerous questions, but I want to learn this! It's interesting to me.

[Adam Tyson]

1. Yes, this is a Strengthen question, asking for an answer that supports the conclusion, rather than for something that the author absolutely must believe.

2. It's always good to be cautious, of course, but when looking to strengthen an argument that is about a relative or comparative claim, some hard numbers might, in some cases, be very helpful! It depends on how they are presented, and whether the stimulus also includes any absolute statements. But generally, we should expect an answer about the comparison, with words like "more" and "greater" and "higher incidence," etc.

3. It's not about past and future. We use studies all the time to claim what "is" true, even though the data is always something gathered in the past, even if it may be the very recent past.

4. Yes, relative and comparative statements are the same thing. They both are about measuring two things in relation to each other.