Q7

[jpchris3]

Hi,

I narrowed down my choices to D and E, but had trouble understanding E and why E was ultimately better.

For D, I reasoned that the false crime reports were a factor (like El Nino) that should have been accounted for before making a conclusion.

Thanks!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Great question! Answer choices (D) and (E) are very similar, huh?

The short explanation for why answer choice (E) is better than answer choice (D) is that in the passage the author is concerned with attributing a change in temperature to volcanic eruptions. Answer choice (E) also deals with attributing a change to a particular phenomenon. Answer choice (D) does not attempt to atribute any sort of change to a phenomenon but rather to calculate the total amount of something.

We're asked to find an analogous error to the one of not including the effect of El Niño on the Earth's climate. Answer choice is (E) is also an error of not calculating the partial effect of one phenomenon when attempting to calculate the effect of another on some change in the environment (the change in the average age of a country).

Incorrect Answers

(A) is an error of not calculating the total amount of something when calculating the amount of some of the total's parts.
(B) does not discuss two potential influences on something and then seek to quantify one of those influences in order to understand the impact of the other influence.
(C) is similar to answer choice (B) in that there is no discussion of more than one influence on something. We need an answer choice that points out that the size of one influencing factor must first be determined before we can find the size of another influencing factor of some phenomenon.
(D) does not seek to find the size of the influence of one factor before determining the size of another influencing factor

[jpchris3]

Thanks for the great explanation--this was a very tricky question!

[Nina]

Thanks for great explanation, Matt! just a quick question, how do we know that not taking El Nino into account is an error? i found nowhere in the passage that the author thinks it is an erroneous method of studying the volcanic eruption effect, although an arguable method.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Hey Nina, in lines 13-15 the author says that the connection "seems" plausible, but it is not as strong as previously believed. That's enough for me to say that not including the El-Nino effect led to believing the connection between volcanos and climate was stronger than it really is. That's an error in my book.

Hope that helps!

[wgutx08]

Maybe one more thing to add to Matt's explanation:

False reports in (D) only increases the number of crimes, whereas the age of new immigrants in (E) can increase or decrease the average age.

This may be significant because the text emphasizes the "bi-directionality" of the impact of El nino in L23-26.