GRE General TestAnalytical WritingMedium
A recent study found that individuals who regularly consume dark chocolate have lower rates of heart disease. A health blog concludes, 'Eating dark chocolate prevents heart disease.' What critical piece of information is most likely missing from the blog's conclusion?
- AThe maximum effective dosage of dark chocolate.
- BThe age demographic of the study participants.
- CThe specific type of dark chocolate consumed.
- DWhether the study controlled for other lifestyle factors.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: D. Whether the study controlled for other lifestyle factors.
The blog's conclusion implies a causal link ('prevents'). To establish causation, a study must control for confounding variables. Without knowing if other lifestyle factors (like exercise, diet, genetics) were controlled, the observed correlation might not be due to dark chocolate alone.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. Dosage is a practical detail but doesn't resolve the core issue of whether chocolate *prevents* disease or is merely correlated with lower rates.
- B. The age demographic is important for generalizability but doesn't directly address the causal claim.
- C. While helpful for specifics, knowing the type of chocolate doesn't address the fundamental issue of causation vs. correlation.
Causation vs. Correlation
Correlation indicates a relationship between two variables, while causation means one variable directly causes a change in another. Correlation does not imply causation.
- Correlation: variables move together, but one doesn't necessarily cause the other.
- Causation: one variable directly influences another.
- Establishing causation requires controlling for confounding variables and often experimental design.
Memory trick: Causes CREATE clear connections.