Patients suffering from depression generally report a significant improvement in mood levels after being given Depsol, a new antidepressant drug. Doctors have cited an increase in activities such as visits to movie theaters, garment purchases, and dining out at restaurants as evidence of the patients' improved mood levels.Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the doctors' conclusion?Depressed patients report feeling better after taking Depsol. Doctors point to more outings and spending (movies, clothes, restaurants) as evidence that the patients’ moods improved.
(A) The mood enhancement reported by depressed patients is rarely found among those who are seriously ill.
This is off target. It compares depressed patients to seriously ill patients, and it does not show the mood improvement in the depressed patients was not caused by Depsol.
(B) The purchases and activities reported could have led to mood enhancement among the patients studied.
This most seriously weakens the conclusion because it flips the direction: the behavior changes could be the cause of the improved mood, so the doctors’ evidence is
not evidence that Depsol improved mood.
It introduces a strong alternative explanation for the improvement.(C) The same drug, when administered to individuals without depression, produced no significant mood enhancement.
Not a weaken. A drug could help depressed patients but not noticeably affect people who are already not depressed.
(D) The patients' reports about their mood levels are significantly influenced by subjective factors.
Too generic. Mood reports are inherently subjective, and this does not show the specific reported improvement is unreliable or unrelated to Depsol.
(E) An increase in movie theater visits, garment purchases, and dining out is commonly reported by the general population as a sign of better mood levels.
This supports the doctors: it says those activities are commonly associated with better mood.
Answer: (B)