LSAT (Law School Admission Test)Logical ReasoningEasy

A recent study found that individuals who regularly consume caffeine tend to report higher levels of daily stress. Therefore, to reduce daily stress, one should eliminate caffeine from their diet.

  1. AIt fails to consider that individuals with high stress might be more likely to consume caffeine.
  2. BIt does not define what 'regularly consume caffeine' means.
  3. CIt assumes that caffeine is the sole cause of daily stress.
  4. DIt overlooks the possibility that some individuals may experience no stress regardless of caffeine intake.
Show answer & explanation

Correct answer: A. It fails to consider that individuals with high stress might be more likely to consume caffeine.

The argument concludes that eliminating caffeine will reduce stress based on a correlation. However, it fails to consider the possibility that the relationship is reversed, meaning stress causes caffeine consumption, not the other way around. This is a classic correlation-causation fallacy.

Why the other options are wrong

  • B. A lack of definition for 'regularly' might weaken the study's precision but doesn't expose a fundamental flaw in the logical leap from correlation to causation.
  • C. While the argument implies caffeine is a cause, it doesn't necessarily assume it's the *sole* cause. Even if other causes exist, the argument could still hold if caffeine is *a* cause. The primary flaw is the direction of causation.
  • D. The argument is about reducing stress for those who experience it, not about those who experience no stress. This option is irrelevant to the core argument's flaw.

Reverse Causation

A flaw in reasoning where the arguer incorrectly assumes a causal direction between two correlated events, when the true causal relationship might be the opposite.

  • Occurs when X is correlated with Y, and it's concluded X causes Y, but Y might actually cause X.
  • A common type of correlation-causation fallacy.
  • Requires considering alternative causal models.

Memory trick: Don't assume the arrow points the way you see it; it might be reversed!

More Logical Reasoning questions