#6 - People who listen to certain recordings of music are

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Must Be True. The correct answer choice is (D)

Apparently, some music recordings contain spoken messages recorded backwards that can influence the people listening to them. It is unclear how exactly such subliminal messages influence the listeners or whether their comprehension is even conscious or subconscious. Since so much information is missing from the stimulus, it is better to examine each answer choice and determine by the process of elimination which answer choice contains a consequence (i.e. an inference) of the view expressed in the stimulus.

Answer choice (A): It is unnecessary that the spoken messages be louder than the music to influence their listeners. There surely are other means of subliminally influencing listeners.

Answer choice (B): The stimulus provided no evidence as to whether the quality of the recording is altered by the addition of subliminal messages.

Answer choice (C): The reason why certain recordings of music contain subliminal messages is entirely unknown and beyond the scope of this stimulus.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. While there is no reason to suspect that one needs to comprehend the messages in order to be influenced by them, if such comprehension were necessary then clearly people would need to understand spoken messages recorded backwards. Otherwise, no comprehension would be possible and the messages would influence no one.

Answer choice (E): It is unclear whether people pay full attention to the music as it plays. Even if they don't, they may still subconsciously pay attention to the subliminal messages contained in the recording.

[avengingangel]

So "consequence" just means "inference" ? Plain & simple? I don't think I've encountered a question stem with that word before, so it threw me off a bit. The correct answer choice seems like an assumption...



(For my own future reference: 3-122, #29)

[Adam Tyson]

A short answer to a short question here, Angel - yes!

Slightly longer answer here - I would say that a "consequence" here is like an "implication", and that's a term we see in a lot of stimuli, stems, and answer choices.

Good work, keep it up.

[avengingangel]

Thanks, Adam!

[MannyH]

This question is labeled as a MBT-SN problem but I am having trouble identifying the conditional relationship within the stimulus. Can someone please provide some clarity to this.

[Adam Tyson]

"People who" is a classic Conditional Reasoning indicator, Manny, and it introduces a Sufficient Condition. The stimulus could be diagrammed as:

Listen Danger

(Listen = listen to certain recordings, Danger = danger of being influenced by spoken messages)

[lsnewbie]

Hello PS,

I understand that answer choice D is the correct answer here, but I selected E. My two contender choices were D + E but I selected E because I thought the likelihood of someone being influenced by spoken messages was dependent on that person paying attention to the music. The question stem did not say anything about the person having to comprehend the message for it to exert influence, just that "people who listen to certain recordings of music are in danger of being unduly influenced by spoken messages". I understand that the term "full attention" in choice E may be going too far, but in comparing it to choice D, I still thought it was the better answer choice. It also seems that from Adam's last drawing of the conditional relationship in this stimulus that the relationship points to answer E being the better answer. Can you please explain why E is an incorrect answer choice?

Thank you!

[James Finch]

Hi LS Newbie,

As a Must be True question, we're looking for something we know has to be 100% true, based on the stimulus. The immediate problem with (E) is the "full attention," which should raise red flags because of how strict its scope is. The stimulus doesn't have such a strict scope--people are "in danger of being unduly influenced"--so demanding "full attention" is unnecessary. What if you're only paying 3/4 attention, wouldn't you still be "in danger" of being "influenced?" So (E) doesn't work, since we don't know for certain, from the information in the stimulus, that people give full attention when they listen to music.

Contrast that to (D), which fits with the scope we are given; in order to exert influence, people must understand those messages in some form or fashion (I take "comprehend" here to be broader than only a conscious understanding, but more to mean instilling a subconscious, Pavlovian type of understanding). If not, then there is no danger of unduly influencing anyone.

Hope this clears things up!

[andriana.caban]

Hi!

I annotated my explanations of why I eliminated incorrect answer choices (a), (b), (c), and (e). Please let me know if I was on the path!

Complete Question Explanation

Answer choice (A): It is unnecessary that the spoken messages be louder than the music to influence their listeners. There surely are other means of subliminally influencing listeners. Even if the spoken messages were louder than the music, this answer choice is too vague. How loud? Theoretically, you can have the music lower than the messages and still not be able to hear the messages

Answer choice (B): The stimulus provided no evidence as to whether the quality of the recording is altered by the addition of subliminal messages. Answer choice states what can be added, but author isn't concerned with what can happen and instead discusses a claim ("people who listen..."

Answer choice (C): The reason why certain recordings of music contain subliminal messages is entirely unknown and beyond the scope of this stimulus. Again, the author doesn't mention if these messages are popular or if they induce a trancelike state. Author simply states that individuals who listen to certain recordings of music may be influenced by spoken messages

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. While there is no reason to suspect that one needs to comprehend the messages in order to be influenced by them, if such comprehension were necessary then clearly people would need to understand spoken messages recorded backwards. Otherwise, no comprehension would be possible and the messages would influence no one. I chose this for the same reason you wrote (also, I eliminated the other answers). Couldn't this answer choice read as an Assumption rather a Must Be True. The author is assuming that those being influenced can actually hear the spoken messages. Unless, how could they be influenced? But, since this was a Must Be True I examined the stimulus and corresponding answer choices because for way too long. Can someone explain why, instead of an assumption the author relies upon to make their argument, is an inference?

Answer choice (E): It is unclear whether people pay full attention to the music as it plays. Even if they don't, they may still subconsciously pay attention to the subliminal messages contained in the recording.If this answer choice had said, "When people listen...they pay full attention to the spoken messages" would it be correct as well? I eliminated because, even if they did pay full attention to the music it is unclear if they can hear the spoken messages within the music.

[James Finch]

Hi Andriana,

(D) is both an inference and a necessary assumption; the way we know it is necessary is by inference. On earlier tests like these the question stems would sometimes be asking for an answer choice that would more likely be associated with another question type, but would fit as a correct answer for both. That's still true to some extent (most notable with Flaw questions asking about an assumption/"presumption" being made in the stimulus). For the LSAT, you always need to remain flexible and use best practices (such as process of elimination using the Fact Test, as you did here) in order to get to the correct answer.

Hope this helps!