Passage Summary: A study found that people who suspected they had a specific ear infection were usually right, so the author concludes that people don't really need doctors to diagnose this condition.

Conclusion: Most people are capable of accurately diagnosing themselves with swimmer's ear without a doctor's help.

Reasoning: A study showed that 84 percent of people who thought they had swimmer's ear were correct, a rate slightly higher than that of physicians.

Analysis: The argument suffers from a significant sampling flaw: it only looks at people who *already suspected* they had the condition. It completely ignores the 'false negatives'—people who have a dangerous condition but think it's just swimmer's ear—which was the critics' primary concern. To weaken this, look for an answer that suggests the 16% error rate is dangerous or that the study's group doesn't represent the general population's diagnostic ability. The comparison to doctors is a bit of a red herring intended to distract you from the narrowness of the study group.