Nihit wrote:
Reviewing historical data, medical researchers in California found that counties with the largest number of television sets per capita have had the lowest incidence of a serious brain disease, mosquito-borne encephalitis. The researchers have concluded that people in these counties stay indoors more and thus avoid exposure to the disease.
The researchers conclusion would be most strengthened if which of the following were true?
(A) Programs designed to control the size of disease-bearing mosquito populations have not affected the incidence of mosquito borne encephalitis.
(B) The occupations of county residents affect their risk of exposure to mosquito-borne encephalitis more than does television-watching.
(C) The incidence of mosquito-borne encephalitis in counties with the largest number of television sets per capita is likely to decrease even further.
(D) The more time people in a county spend outdoors, the greater their awareness of the dangers of mosquito-borne encephalitis.
(E) The more television sets there are per capita in a county, the more time the average county resident spends watching television.
Counties with largest number of tv sets per capita (say, 3 TVs per person) have lowest incidence of mosquito borne Ence.
Conclusion: People in these counties stay indoors more and thus avoid exposure to the disease.
There is a gap here. How does having more TVs lead to staying indoors more? Whether I have 1 TV or 3 TVs, I can watch only 1 at a time. Just because I have 3 for myself, would I watch TV for thrice the hours? No. I just want one in my living, one in my bedroom and one in my kitchen - just to ensure that when I want to watch, I cans it anywhere and watch. More TVs means more convenience but doesn't imply more TV watching hrs.
(A) Programs designed to control the size of disease-bearing mosquito populations have not affected the incidence of mosquito borne encephalitis.
The smaller population of mosquitoes has no impact on incidence. This is irrelevant. We want to see how the "increase in the number of TVs per capita" impacts incidence.
(B) The occupations of county residents affect their risk of exposure to mosquito-borne encephalitis more than does television-watching.
This takes away some of the punch of the conclusion. That occupations affect risk of exposure more than TV. Does it make TV a stronger reason or staying indoors and avoiding mosquitoes? No. So not a strengthener.
(C) The incidence of mosquito-borne encephalitis in counties with the largest number of television sets per capita is likely to decrease even further.
Why would the incidence in these countries decrease even further? Is there another factor at play here in these countries because of which the incidence is continuing to decrease? We don't know. Not a strengthener.
(D) The more time people in a county spend outdoors, the greater their awareness of the dangers of mosquito-borne encephalitis.
This says that staying outdoors increase awareness. That would reduce incidence. This is opposite to what the conclusion is saying.
(E) The more television sets there are per capita in a county, the more time the average county resident spends watching television.
This tells us that more TVs actually does mean more TV watching hours. Well, then it makes sense that they stay more indoors and hence reduce the incidence of mosquito bites. It strengthens our conclusion.
Answer (E)
I could cut down to option A and Option E for a final pick.
I agree that option E is a better choice, but I feel Option A is also strengthing the conclusion to certain extent.
If we are saying that a certain cause has not lead to a particular effect, doesn't it strength the conclusion that Staying indoors has led to decrease in the diseases.
Basically what I am saying is they have eliminated a third cause.