Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that

Conclusion : Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Choice D : Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children. Let us negate this assumption. So it would be something like : "Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will might be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children". Does this kill the conclusion??. The answer would be NO. One can still argue that even though the children incorrectly identified might be affected, the test would still be reliable in detecting autism wherever it IS present and hence would still benefit autistic children.

Choice B : A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions. Let us negate this assumption. It would be something like : A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis might not provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions. Does this kill the conclusion?? The answer would be YES. If the test is not a reliable one, then it would not be of much benefit in identifying autism in early stages.

Hope it is clear.

The argument doesn't clearly mention that there were no tests available prior to this one, it only mentions "a new test that for the first time accurately diagnoses autism in children", hence A cannot be the right choice.

B seems to be the correct answer, since it assumes that a few false cases cannot undermine the credibility of the new test. So IMO B.

Tricky Question B is the Answer

Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnoses autism in children as young as 18 months old. When used to evaluate 16,000 children at their 18-month checkup, the test correctly diagnosed all 10 children later confirmed to be autistic, though it also wrongly identified 2 children as autistic. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the reporter's argument depends?

A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised.
A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnoses autism in children as young as 18 months old Based on First statement in the stimulus, A is Fact not an assumption

B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions.

C) The new test can be used to evaluate all children. regardless of the level of development of their verbal skills.

D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children.

Argument in the stimulus is Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available. Here he is only intrested in the austic childrn. non austic is out of scope and trap here.

E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test.

This is quite hard question for me. Actually, I confuse between choice B and D, but I incline to B little bit.

Conclusion = Autistic children can benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Apply the negate technique with all 5 choices.
(A) There are some tests intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised. => no affect the conclusion because whether some tests before existed but still were lower in quality than the new ones. The argument still stand.
(B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis CANNOT still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions. => If this thing happens, the 2 children that were diagnosed wrongly likely to be affected adversely, the argument collapsed by DIRECT effect => This is the correct answer
(C) easy to spot as wrong answer
(D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will BE adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children => This is wrong because of CERTAINTY of "WILL" that is very different from choice (B)
(E) easy to spot as wrong asnwer.
_________________

Can some one please explain me why not D.

I Agree its bit B & D, I'm still more inclined to D.
_________________

Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnosesautism in children as young as 18 months old. When used to evaluate 16,000 children at their 18-month checkup, the test correctly diagnosed all 10 children later confirmed to be autistic, though it also wrongly identified 2 children as autistic. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the reporter's argument depends?

A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised....incorrect.... the stimulus says none existed which could accurately diagnose....not that could diagnose...

B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions.correct.. If Autistic children can now benefit much earlier in life than before despite few wrong reports ....this statement is correct.

C) The new test can be used to evaluate all children. regardless of the level of development of their verbal skillsonly autistic children considered in argument ... not all.

D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children...we cant say that.....may/ may not be true.....

E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test.irrelevant...


kudos if you please...

This is one is definitely B.

Answer choice A takes it way too far as to state 'No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised.' but the conclusion doesn't go that far.

Answer choice C also takes it too far as to state 'The new test can be used to evaluate all children. regardless of the level of development of their verbal skills.' and actually is irrelevant because nothing has been stated about verbal skills at all.

Answer choice E, again similar to A takes it way too far, it is unknown if "There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test." It could very well be true that there was reliable evidence however it isn't as effective as the new test.

Answer choice D is trap answer because it makes it out to seem that the conclusion misses out on the false positives (those that did not have autism but the test stated that they do). However the conclusion does not even mention those children as the basis of the conclusion therefore it is actually irrelevant.

Answer choice B, while I still don't like it is one that is definitely conservative with the word, 'sometimes' however as stated some of the posters above, it does discredit the false negatives so that there is less worries about that case.

Therefore, I went with answer choice B.
smashzone, what is the source of the problem?

Excellent LSAT question that I am bumping once more. Easy question to get wrong if you do not pay attention to the conclusion.
_________________

Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnoses autism in children as young as 18 months old. When used to evaluate 16,000 children at their 18-month checkup, the test correctly diagnosed all 10 children later confirmed to be autistic, though it also wrongly identified 2 children as autistic. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the reporter's argument depends?

So a new test has been divised by scientists to ACCURATELY FOR THE FIRST time identify autism among children. So from 16000 kids, 10 were later diognised with autism, Also 2 kids were wrongly identified as autistic. Assumption ?


A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised. THIS INFORMATION IS FALSE, I.E. CANT BE AS AN ASSUMPTION. BECAUSE WE TALK ABOUT THE TEST THAT ACCURATELY IDENTIFIED DIAGNOSIS.


B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions. ( I WILL KEEP IT. AND GET BACK TO IT LATER. SO AFTER ELIMINANATING 4 ANSWER CHOICES. I CAN SAFELY ASSUME THAT DESPITE TWO CHILDREN BEING WRONGLY DIAGNOSIED, THE TEST IS STILL BENEFICIAL TO MANY CHILDREN) I.E. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.


C) The new test can be used to evaluate all children. regardless of the level of development of their verbal skills. (WE ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH VERBAL SKILLS. OUT OF SCOPE.)

D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children. (I CANT ASSUME THIS INFORMATION. BECAUSE NO INFORMATION IS GIVEN WHAT HAPPENED TO THOSE TWO KIDS. MAY BE THEY UNDERGONE UNENESEESSARY TREATMENT THAT CAUSED SIDE EFFECTS. SO OUT OF SCOPE.

E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test. WE ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH ADVENT OF NEW TEST)

dave13, I think we rule out option A not because the info is false. But because it is a fact ( as it is already stated in the argument in the line " recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnoses autism" which implies no such test existed earlier. So Option A seems like it is strengthening the argument and hence is a valid candidate for being the assumption. However, since it is already mentioned in argument, it cannot be an assumption.

This is a recurring trap in find assumption type questions.

Best,
Gladi


_________________

Hey Gladi Gladiator59

many thanks for sharing your thoughts on this highly appreciate

let me explain now in details.

i call A as FALSE INFORMATION, because if it is assumed it will be false Why ?


lets read first sentence of argument:

A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time [b]accurately diagnoses autism in children as young as 18 months old.
[/b]

this sentence talks about A TEST THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME COULD ACCURATELY identify autism.

Notice the word ACCURATELY now this implies that there is possibility that tests were devised before this test, but those earlier tests were not ACCURATE.

now lets reads A option

A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised.

Now what does A says, it says NO TEST (IN GENERAL ) was invented before the new test.

Now Read First Sentence of an argument again

HENCE IF I ASSUME THE INFO GIVEN IN OPTION A, IT WILL BE FALSE INFO I.E. FALSE ASSUMPTION BECAUSE WHO KNOWS WERE THERE TESTS EARLIER IN GENERAL OR NOT. MAYBE YES. MAYBE NO. BASED ON MY REASONING THE INFO IN OPTION A IS NOT GIVEN AS THE FACT IN THE ARGUMENT . ANYWAY THIS IS MY TRAIN OF THOUGHTS

have a great start of Monday

Just so there is no confusion for A:

Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnoses autism in children as young as 18 months old. When used to evaluate 16,000 children at their 18-month checkup, the test correctly diagnosed all 10 children later confirmed to be autistic, though it also wrongly identified 2 children as autistic. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the reporter's argument depends?


A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised. -- It says intended. Who cares about intent? What if a test was intended to test for an allergy to Lima Beans, but ended up being a reliable test to diagnose autistic children? Beyond this, if we negate to "a test intended.....", this still would NOT destroy our conclusion

For those who question D:

D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children -- I know this sounds bad, but who cares about those who are misdiagnosed? Our conclusion is about those who are autistic, and those who are classified autistic when they are not is beyond our scope for this question. Do not let your heart trick you into this answer!
_________________

A isn’t an assumption, its stated in the passage. C is outside the scope of the passage, as is E. D is also not relevant to the conclusion. The conclusion is about the test being beneficial for autistic children. D does support the test as a viable practice but it isn’t related to the conclusion drawn here. So, the answer is B.

Argument - A new test that can detect autism in children as young as 18 months old.
Accuracy of 80% in a sample test of 16000 children.
Conclusion - Children can benefit much earlier in life than before.

Note: Here, the argument is talking about children benefiting earlier in life - means if previously the treatment started at 24 months old age, now the treatment can start at 19 months old age.
This is possible only if the data generated from the tests can be used for the treatment.

(A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised.
- This is same information as presented in the passage. Even though assumption does not demand new information per say, a existing statement in the passage can never act as an assumption.
- Wrong

(B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions.
- As stated in the note, we are trying to find a relation that can relate the test results with treatment. The choice states that even if the accuracy is not high, the test results can serve as a reliable data to start the treatment.
- Thus now, children can avail the treatment even when they are 18 months old compared to previous case, when they could avail the treatment at a much elder age.
- Correct

(C) The new test can be used to evaluate all children regardless of the level of development of their verbal skills.
- Verbal skills may be related to autism in real scenario. But we need to stick to the argument.
- What parameters the test uses is out of the scope of this argument
- Wrong

(D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children.
- I differ with many of the explanations posted here.
- This choice states that the 20% of incorrectly tested children will not be adversely affected.
- The conclusion is about the "time of start of treatment". The conclusion is not about whether the children can benefit from the treatments. Hence, the effect of the treatment on normal people is immaterial.
- Please do correct me if there is a fault in my interpretation

(E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test.
- Similar to option A, this choice repeats the information provided in the passage
- Wrong

Here's my 2 cents for someone who is confused btw B & D.

For almost all of the CR questions, one should always make a note on what the conclusion is talking about & here our,

Conclusion:

is concerned solely on Autistic children who will benefit from early diagnosis. It is not concerned with wrong diagnosis or non-autistic children. Hence, when we negate option D, we get " Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children." which is not making a dent on our conclusion/ argument. Our argument is not falling apart if negated D stands true, since our concern is only with autistic children.
_________________

Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnoses autism in children as young as 18 months old. When used to evaluate 16,000 children at their 18-month checkup, the test correctly diagnosed all 10 children later confirmed to be autistic, though it also wrongly identified 2 children as autistic. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the reporter's argument depends?

(A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised. - WRONG. Even if there was whether it was effective or not still remains a valid question. But we are concerned with this test only.

(B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions. - CORRECT. If it doesn't provide reasonable basis then passage conclusion falls apart.

(C) The new test can be used to evaluate all children regardless of the level of development of their verbal skills. - WRONG. What about after evaluation was done? This is where this choice falters.

(D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children. - WRONG. Two problems with this choice - one that children incorrectly identified are not concerned and another that the degree of adversity. Both are irrelevant.

(E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test. - WRONG. It doesn't matter and even if there was it doesn't matter. Whether children benefit or not still remains a quesiton.

Answer B.
_________________