Many studies have shown that users of anabolic steroids

The first sentence is stating that "steroid rage" or "roid rage" in anabolic steroids causes aggression. The second sentence argues that people who choose to take steroids are by default more aggressive .... (so stating something like .. steroid are not responsible for the agression .. )

hope that helps!

Premise : Many studies show that the people who use anabolic steroids commit violent crimes at a greater rate than the people who do not use it. That is, for example, people who use anabolic steroids commit crimes say 5 in 100 days as opposed to people who do not use steroids who commit crimes say 1 in 100 days.
This situation of the users of anabolic steroids is called steroid rage or roid rage and this is suggested by the studies.

So, what the above situation says is that if you use anabolic steroids , you tend to commit more violent crimes, or show more aggression.

Conclusion: The above situation is mistaken since, the people who show more aggression and who commit more crimes tend to use steroids and not the other way around.

Question Stem: Which of the following strengthens..

A: This says that if you use anabolic steroids you become aggressive since they elevate the hormone levels associated with aggressive behaviour. This is weakening. Wrong.

B: This says the aggressive behaviour decreases when the users of anabolic steroids stop the usage of anabolic steroids. This again weakens the argument. Wrong.

C: This is the trap answer and one may select this when in a time constraint. This actually says individuals who use steroids have aggressive behaviour and greater sex drive that is if you use steroids you tend to become aggressive. This is perhaps the restatement of the premise. This once again weakens the conclusion so this is wrong.

D: This answer option says that those who use steroids do not really or actually have greater aggression than others who do not use it. That is in terms of violent crimes both show equal rates ... since crimes are committed when accompanied with aggression. That is both show 5 in 100 and 5 in 100 as discussed in the first few lines of this post. So, this actually strengthen the conclusion. Lets hold this answer.

E: This answer says if a person is proved guilty of a crime when the person was actually using steroids, is not proven guilty of a crime again, even if the person continues to use steroids. This answer doesnt really compare with people who are not using steroids, and in clear words it says the crime rate doesnt differ or comes down even if one continues to use steroids. This is a weak strengthener with no comparisons with the normal people.. if there were any comparisons then this would go as the right answer.

So , D vs E.. D wins the game.
D is the right answer.

Premise : Many studies show that the people who use anabolic steroids commit violent crimes at a greater rate than the people who do not use it. That is, for example, people who use anabolic steroids commit crimes say 5 in 100 days as opposed to people who do not use steroids who commit crimes say 1 in 100 days.
This situation of the users of anabolic steroids is called steroid rage or roid rage and this is suggested by the studies.

So, what the above situation says is that if you use anabolic steroids , you tend to commit more violent crimes, or show more aggression.

Conclusion: The above situation is mistaken since, the people who show more aggression and who commit more crimes tend to use steroids and not the other way around.

Question Stem: Which of the following strengthens..

A: This says that if you use anabolic steroids you become aggressive since they elevate the hormone levels associated with aggressive behaviour. This is weakening. Wrong.

B: This says the aggressive behaviour decreases when the users of anabolic steroids stop the usage of anabolic steroids. This again weakens the argument. Wrong.

C: This is the trap answer and one may select this when in a time constraint. This actually says individuals who use steroids have aggressive behaviour and greater sex drive that is if you use steroids you tend to become aggressive. This is perhaps the restatement of the premise. This once again weakens the conclusion so this is wrong.

D: This answer option says that those who use steroids do not really or actually have greater aggression than others who do not use it. That is in terms of violent crimes both show equal rates ... since crimes are committed when accompanied with aggression. That is both show 5 in 100 and 5 in 100 as discussed in the first few lines of this post. So, this actually strengthen the conclusion. Lets hold this answer.

E: This answer says if a person is proved guilty of a crime when the person was actually using steroids, is not proven guilty of a crime again, even if the person continues to use steroids. This answer doesnt really compare with people who are not using steroids, and in clear words it says the crime rate doesnt differ or comes down even if one continues to use steroids. This is a weak strengthener with no comparisons with the normal people.. if there were any comparisons then this would go as the right answer.

So , D vs E.. D wins the game.
D is the right answer.

@harsa3699, Thanks for the explanation. Really worthy

Hi,
The answers provided to justify D are really not convincing.

The Conclusion says that People who use steroids are innately more aggressive than the general public, but option D says
" Among people with identical histories of aggression, users of anabolic steroids do not exhibit significantly greater aggression than do non-users.", meaning People with Identical Aggression Histories, Steroids users show almost equal aggression as non steroid users. This actually weakens the conclusion.
Would someone please explain.

It has been observed that there's a correlation between anabolic steroids (usage) and (habitual aggression and violent crime). A study claims that anabolic steroids causes habitual aggression and violent crime.

The author of the passage makes the statement that the study's claim is wrong and we have been asked to strengthen the author's position.


a. Anabolic steroids produce significant increases in the levels of the hormones that are principally associated with aggressive behavior. - this does the opposite of what we have been asked to do; it strengthens the study's claim and weakens the author's claim. Hence, eliminate (A)

b. Users of anabolic steroids must regularly “cycle off” the steroids; during these off-cycle times, their levels of aggression tend to decrease significantly. - this answer choice does not reject the causal relationship between steroids and aggression. Hence, eliminate (B)

c. Individuals who choose to use anabolic steroids tend to have unusually high ambition and sex drives. - irrelevant. Eliminate (C)

d. Among people with identical histories of aggression, users of anabolic steroids do not exhibit significantly greater aggression than do non-users. - here, there's a congruent comparison being drawn: People with identical histories of aggression. Among such people, the steroid did not cause its users to exhibit more aggression. BINGO. this is what we are looking for. Hence, (D) is the correct answer choice.

e. Among individuals convicted of violent offenses while on anabolic steroids, most are not convicted again, even if they continue to use anabolic steroids. - this talks about "repetitive conviction", which is totally irrelevant. Hence, Eliminate (E)

The passage discounts the idea that anabolic steroid use causes aggressive behavior, stating that the causation actually runs in reverse: viz., a pre-existing tendency toward aggression motivates individuals to use anabolic steroids.

(A)
This statement, if true, weakens the argument considerably, because it provides strong support for the contention that the steroids themselves cause aggressive behavior.

(B)
This statement actually weakens the argument, because, if steroid users’ aggression were due to an innate predisposition, then that aggression would be expected not to decline when steroid use is discontinued.

(C)
Although this statement is similar to the hypothesis in the argument – that individuals who choose steroids have different innate personality characteristics than do others – it deals only with sex drive and ambition. It does not deal with aggression, which is the sole focus of the passage, and is therefore irrelevant to the argument.

(D) Correct
This observation controls the variable cited as important in the passage – the individuals’ history of aggression (which serves as an indicator of their innate tendency toward aggression) – and finds that, when that history is identical, anabolic steroids have essentially no effect on aggression. This is strong evidence for the fact that the tendency toward aggression itself, and not the steroid use, causes the aggression seen in steroid users.

(E)
This statement is irrelevant to the passage. First, convictions for violent offenses are not necessarily a good proxy for aggression itself. Second, the statement does not distinguish between convicts who continue steroid use and those who do not, a distinction that is key for resolving the issue presented in the passage.

OE:

The passage discounts the idea that anabolic steroid use causes aggressive behavior, stating that the causation actually runs in reverse: viz., a pre-existing tendency toward aggression motivates individuals to use anabolic steroids.

(A)
This statement, if true, weakens the argument considerably, because it provides strong support for the contention that the steroids themselves cause aggressive behavior.

(B)
This statement actually weakens the argument, because, if steroid users’ aggression were due to an innate predisposition, then that aggression would be expected not to decline when steroid use is discontinued.

(C)
Although this statement is similar to the hypothesis in the argument – that individuals who choose steroids have different innate personality characteristics than do others – it deals only with sex drive and ambition. It does not deal with aggression, which is the sole focus of the passage, and is therefore irrelevant to the argument.

(D) Correct
This observation controls the variable cited as important in the passage – the individuals’ history of aggression (which serves as an indicator of their innate tendency toward aggression) – and finds that, when that history is identical, anabolic steroids have essentially no effect on aggression. This is strong evidence for the fact that the tendency toward aggression itself, and not the steroid use, causes the aggression seen in steroid users.

(E)
This statement is irrelevant to the passage. First, convictions for violent offenses are not necessarily a good proxy for aggression itself. Second, the statement does not distinguish between convicts who continue steroid use and those who do not, a distinction that is key for resolving the issue presented in the passage.