Official Explanation

(1) Identify the Question

The question asks for an answer that strongly supports the psychologist’s statement. Therefore, this is a Strengthen the Argument problem.

(2) Deconstruct the Argument

The argument describes two groups of cyclists who participated in a study. The groups trained in the same way, but members of one group saw data that let them compare themselves against others, and the other group saw no data. Since the first group improved more, the psychologist has concluded that competing against others must have had a positive effect on those cyclists.

Here is one possible way to map the argument.

grp 1: data on self & others

grp 2: no data

grp 1 improved more

© competition helps performance

(3) State the Goal

In a Strengthen the Argument problem, the goal is to find the answer choice that makes the conclusion more likely to be correct. In this case, the right answer will suggest that the performance effect shown in the studies was, in fact, due to competition.

(4) Work from Wrong to Right

(A) This answer suggests that competition causes athletes to train more diligently. In the real world, it would make sense to conclude, based on this, that competition improves performance. However, there isn’t necessarily a link between sticking to a training program and better performance. Also, the question asks about the psychologist’s interpretation of this particular study. In this study, all of the athletes adhered to the same training program, so the effect couldn’t have been caused by a difference in adherence.

(B) CORRECT. One possible objection to the argument is that cyclists in the first group may have improved because they saw their own data, in which case their improvement would have had nothing to do with competition against the rest of the group. This answer choice negates that objection by showing that seeing the data of the rest of the group was necessary. Given choice (B), it is more likely that competing against the group—not just having personal data—caused the improvement.

(C) This answer refers to competitiveness, while the psychologist’s conclusion attributes the effect to actually competing against other athletes. Even if competitiveness improves performance, the act of competing may or may not have an impact. Also, the study examined a performance improvement among one group of cyclists, not an overall higher performance. Even if some cyclists had a stronger performance overall, they may not have improved during the program, and the psychologist’s conclusion would not apply to them.

(D) If stronger cyclists are more likely than weaker cyclists to compete, then this is an alternative explanation for why competing cyclists appear to be stronger. This would make the psychologist’s explanation less likely, not more likely, to be correct. Furthermore, the cyclists in the study chose only to participate in a training program, but did not choose whether to get data that could be used to compete. An answer about choosing to compete isn’t relevant to the cyclists observed.

(E) This answer further explains the degree to which one group of cyclists improved more than the other. However, the psychologist draws a conclusion about why one group improved more than the other, not whether or how much that group improved. This choice does not make it more likely that the psychologist is correct about the cause of the improvement.

Answer: B