Examkin

All practice questions

3960 questions

All types3,960Multiple choice2,053Multiple select382True / False424Matching899Ordering123Fill in the blank38Short answer41
Question 1441Question →

Agricultural Economist: In 2024, the nation of Oakhaven banned the import of proprietary autonomous agricultural drones, prompting domestic farmers to adopt locally manufactured, open-source drones instead. Over the subsequent two years, agricultural yields in Oakhaven increased by 15%, and the average annual cost of farm maintenance dropped substantially. Clearly, the shift to open-source, locally manufactured drones is more efficient for Oakhaven's agricultural sector than relying on imported proprietary models.

Which of the following statements, if true, independently strengthen the economist's argument? (Select all that apply.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Weather patterns, soil health metrics, and seed varieties utilized in Oakhaven over the past two years were virtually identical to those in the two years immediately preceding the 2024 ban.; The previously imported proprietary drones required shipping to foreign facilities for routine servicing, causing prolonged downtime during critical harvests, whereas open-source drones are rapidly serviced on-site using locally 3D-printed parts.

Answer

The statements ruling out alternative environmental causes for the yield increase and detailing the localized, faster repair mechanism.
The argument concludes that open-source drones are more efficient based on two observed phenomena: a 15% yield increase and a drop in maintenance costs. The correct answers bolster this causal claim in two distinct ways. The first correct statement eliminates alternative explanations for the yield increase by confirming that weather and soil factors remained constant, meaning the drones are highly likely to be the catalyst. The second correct statement provides the missing mechanical link for the cost drop by contrasting the efficient on-site repair of the new drones with the prolonged, expensive foreign shipping required by the old proprietary models.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Deconstruct the argument's core structure.
Premise: Switched from proprietary to open-source drones. Premise: Yields increased 15% and maintenance costs dropped. Conclusion: Open-source drones are more efficient.
Identifying the premises and main conclusion is strictly necessary to precisely evaluate the logical gaps.
2
Identify logical vulnerabilities and causal assumptions.
The argument assumes that the new drones actually caused the yield increase (ignoring weather/fertilizer variables) and that the new drones are responsible for the cost drop (ignoring potential shifts in subsidy or labor).
Strengthening an argument typically involves identifying and systematically patching these specific vulnerabilities.
3
Evaluate the options against the identified vulnerabilities.
One correct statement explicitly eliminates alternative variables (weather, seeds) for the yield spike. The other correct statement explains exactly how the new drones lowered costs (on-site repair vs. foreign shipping).
Options that rule out alternate causes or explain the causal mechanism directly increase the overall plausibility of the conclusion.

Key Concept

Strengthen (Causal Reasoning and Eliminating Alternate Explanations)
Question 1442Question →

Epidemiologist: To successfully eradicate the Varia strain of the virus in the metropolitan area, at least 80 percent of the population must be vaccinated. The only currently approved vaccine, Novovax, requires two doses administered exactly three weeks apart to provide immunity. Public health records indicate that while 85 percent of the metropolitan population received the first dose of Novovax, a significant portion of those individuals never returned for the second dose. Consequently, the public health initiative to eradicate the Varia strain will fail.

Which of the following statements must be assumed in order for the epidemiologist's conclusion to be logically drawn? (Select all that apply.)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The portion of the metropolitan population that received the first dose of Novovax but failed to return for the second dose is greater than 5 percent of the total metropolitan population.; The metropolitan area will not achieve the 80 percent vaccination threshold required for eradication through the administration of a vaccine other than Novovax.

Answer

The correct statements are the one establishing that the dropout rate exceeds 5 percent of the total population, and the one establishing that no alternative vaccine will achieve the threshold.
For an assumption to be necessary, its logical negation must cause the argument's conclusion to collapse. Both correct statements pass this Negation Test. First, if the dropout portion were 5 percent or less of the total population, then at least 80 percent would have received both doses, fulfilling the threshold and destroying the conclusion that the initiative will fail. Second, if the 80 percent threshold were achieved through an alternative vaccine, the initiative would succeed, again destroying the conclusion. The argument strictly requires both of these unstated premises to hold true.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the core argument structure and mathematical constraints.
The premises establish an 80 percent threshold for success, and note that 85 percent started the required two-dose regimen but a 'significant portion' dropped out.
Identifying the precise logical and mathematical flow is necessary to spot the unstated gaps in the reasoning.
2
Apply the Negation Test to find the mathematical assumption.
Negating the statement about the 5 percent dropout rate reveals that if 5 percent or fewer dropped out, the 80 percent threshold would still be met. This destroys the conclusion that the initiative will fail.
The Negation Test is the definitive method for proving an assumption is logically necessary.
3
Apply the Negation Test to find the alternative-path assumption.
Negating the statement about other vaccines reveals that if another vaccine achieves the threshold, the initiative succeeds, which also destroys the conclusion.
Arguments predicting definitive failure based on a single failing mechanism must assume that no unstated alternative mechanisms can rescue the situation.

Key Concept

Identifying multiple necessary assumptions in arguments involving mathematical thresholds and exclusive solutions.

Alternative Method

You can mathematically represent the total population as 100 people. First dose recipients = 85 people. Target required = 80 people. The maximum allowable drop-out to still reach the target is 5 people. Thus, the argument logically MUST assume the drop-out is greater than 5 people (5% of 100) in order to definitively conclude that the target of 80 will be missed.
Estimated Time:2m 30s
Question 1443Question →

Literary Critic: In order to be eligible to win the annual Commonwealth Fiction Prize, a novel must first be officially nominated by a certified literary guild. Records confirm that Julian's latest historical novel was recently nominated by a certified literary guild. Thus, Julian's novel is guaranteed to win the Commonwealth Fiction Prize this year.

Which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the literary critic's reasoning?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: treats a condition that is necessary for winning the prize as one that is sufficient to guarantee winning it

Answer

The reasoning is flawed because it treats a condition that is necessary for winning the prize as one that is sufficient to guarantee winning it.
The argument establishes that guild nomination is a necessary requirement for eligibility to win the award. From the fact that this prerequisite is met, the author erroneously deduces that winning the award is guaranteed. This is a classic confusion of a necessary condition with a sufficient condition.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the premises and the conclusion of the argument
Premise 1: Winning requires guild nomination (Win → Nominated). Premise 2: Julian's novel was nominated. Conclusion: Julian's novel will win.
Deconstructing the argument into formal conditional components clarifies the logical relationship between terms.
2
Identify the logical disconnect between the evidence and the conclusion
Being nominated is only a prerequisite for eligibility (a necessary condition). Fulfilling a prerequisite does not guarantee the ultimate outcome (a sufficient condition).
Determining why the premise fails to establish the truth of the conclusion is the core task in identifying reasoning flaws.
3
Match the identified flaw with the correct abstract description
The argument confuses a necessary condition with a sufficient condition.
The correct choice must precisely capture this classic conditional reversal error.

Key Concept

Distinction between Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Question 1444Question →

Consider the following argument:

Only algorithms that undergo rigorous adversarial testing can successfully identify zero-day vulnerabilities. Furthermore, if an algorithmic system requires massive computational overhead, it cannot be deployed on edge devices. The newly developed 'Aegis' protocol is capable of identifying zero-day vulnerabilities. Therefore, the 'Aegis' protocol cannot be deployed on edge devices.

Statement: The assumption "Any algorithmic system that does not require massive computational overhead has not undergone rigorous adversarial testing" is sufficient to logically guarantee the argument's conclusion.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

True
The statement accurately identifies a sufficient assumption. The required logical bridge is 'Rigorous Testing →\rightarrow Massive Overhead'. The provided assumption is its valid contrapositive ('∼\sim Massive Overhead →\rightarrow ∼\sim Rigorous Testing'), which perfectly completes the deductive chain and guarantees the conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Map the formal logic of the premises.
Identify Zero-Day →\rightarrow Rigorous Testing. Massive Overhead →\rightarrow Cannot Deploy on Edge. Aegis →\rightarrow Identify Zero-Day.
Translating the text into conditional relationships is necessary to find the structural gap in the argument.
2
Identify the conclusion and trace the existing logical chain.
Conclusion: Aegis →\rightarrow Cannot Deploy on Edge. Current chain: Aegis →\rightarrow Identify Zero-Day →\rightarrow Rigorous Testing.
This establishes what is known and what needs to be proven deductively.
3
Determine the required missing link.
We need to connect 'Rigorous Testing' to 'Cannot Deploy on Edge'. Since 'Massive Overhead' leads to 'Cannot Deploy on Edge', the required bridge is: Rigorous Testing →\rightarrow Massive Overhead.
A sufficient assumption must fill the exact deductive gap to guarantee the conclusion.
4
Evaluate the provided assumption against the required missing link.
The provided assumption is: Does not require massive overhead →\rightarrow Has not undergone rigorous testing (∼\sim Massive Overhead →\rightarrow ∼\sim Rigorous Testing). This is the logically equivalent contrapositive of the required bridge (Rigorous Testing →\rightarrow Massive Overhead).
A contrapositive functions identically to the original conditional statement, making the assumption completely sufficient.

Key Concept

Sufficient assumptions must provide absolute logical validity to the conclusion by supplying a missing deductive link. This missing link can be presented in its contrapositive form and remain entirely valid.
Question 1445Question →

The reasoning in each of the short arguments below is flawed due to the uncertain use of a key term or phrase. Select the precise abstract description from the right column that accurately characterizes the semantic shift occurring in each argument.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

The city's proposed noise ordinance is highly practical, as the police force can easily enforce its specific decibel limits. However, since the ordinance will drive away the vibrant nightlife that funds our tax base, it is clearly not practical.
Company policy guarantees that employees will be fully compensated for any substantial loss incurred during corporate relocation. Therefore, because my transfer to the overseas branch resulted in a profound loss of my sense of community, I am owed financial compensation.
According to the historical society, the preservation of the old courthouse is a matter of profound public interest. Yet this cannot be true, because a recent poll showed that the vast majority of the public has no interest whatsoever in architecture.
The critic claims the director's latest film is utterly senseless, arguing it lacks any coherent narrative or thematic depth. But this is demonstrably false, since the film relies heavily on bright flashing lights and blaring alarms, which strongly impact the senses.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct matches pair each argument with the precise abstract description of its semantic shift: Practicality (feasibility vs. desirability), Loss (economic vs. emotional), Interest (welfare vs. curiosity), and Senseless (incoherent vs. lacking perceptual stimulation).
Each correct pair accurately identifies the specific word that changes meaning during the course of the argument, and correctly maps the two distinct definitions used to the abstract categories provided in the right-hand items (e.g., feasibility vs. desirability, or economic vs. emotional).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first argument to identify the word whose meaning changes.
The word 'practical' changes from meaning 'capable of being enforced' in the premise to 'having beneficial tax consequences' in the conclusion.
Identifying the dual definitions of the pivoting term is necessary to match it with the abstract description of feasibility versus desirability.
2
Analyze the second argument for a semantic shift.
The term 'loss' shifts from an intended economic meaning in the company policy to an emotional meaning in the employee's claim.
Recognizing the context of the policy (financial) versus the application (emotional) maps directly to the economic/psychological description.
3
Analyze the third argument for its equivocal term.
The phrase 'public interest' (meaning collective welfare) is conflated with the public having an 'interest' (meaning curiosity or engagement) in architecture.
Distinguishing between normative benefit and psychological engagement identifies the correct match.
4
Analyze the fourth argument's semantic pivot.
The word 'senseless' shifts from meaning 'without logical coherence' to meaning 'without sensory impact'.
Contrasting narrative depth with flashing lights reveals the shift between logical and perceptual definitions.

Key Concept

Equivocation (Uncertain Use of a Term)
Estimated Time:2m 30s
Question 1446Question →

Urban Planner: The proposed peak-hour congestion fee for driving into our downtown district will not, as some critics claim, economically devastate small downtown retail businesses by driving shoppers to suburban alternatives. We need only look at the city of Marston, which implemented an identical pricing scheme five years ago. Following the implementation of the fee, Marston experienced a significant drop in downtown vehicular traffic, yet total retail revenue within Marston's downtown congestion zone increased by over 20 percent in the subsequent years.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the urban planner's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: The 20 percent increase in total retail revenue in Marston's downtown zone was not exclusively realized by large corporate retailers while small retail businesses suffered severe economic declines.

Answer

The correct answer is the statement clarifying that the 20 percent increase in total retail revenue in Marston was not exclusively realized by large corporate retailers while small retail businesses suffered severe declines.
The urban planner attempts to prove that small businesses will not be harmed by pointing to a 20 percent increase in total retail revenue in another city. However, total revenue is an aggregate metric that could easily mask severe disparities among different types of businesses. For the planner's evidence to successfully defend small businesses, it must be true that the overall increase wasn't merely the result of large corporations making massive gains while small businesses were devastated. By applying the Negation Technique, we assume the opposite: what if the revenue gains in Marston WERE exclusively realized by large corporate retailers, while small retail businesses suffered severe economic declines? If this were true, Marston's example would actually prove the critics right, completely destroying the urban planner's conclusion. Because negating this statement destroys the argument, it is a necessary assumption.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the argument's structure to identify the conclusion and the supporting evidence.
Conclusion: The fee will not devastate small downtown retail businesses. Premise: In Marston, an identical fee led to a 20% increase in total downtown retail revenue despite a drop in traffic.
Identifying the core argument is necessary to pinpoint the exact logical gap between the evidence provided and the specific claim being made.
2
Identify the logical shift in scope between the premises and the conclusion.
The premise provides evidence about 'total retail revenue' (the aggregate whole), but the conclusion makes a specific claim about 'small downtown retail businesses' (a constituent part).
Arguments that use evidence about an entire group to defend a specific subgroup often commit a flaw of division, requiring an assumption that the subgroup's experience mirrors the whole.
3
Apply the Negation Technique to the candidate assumptions to see which one destroys the conclusion.
Negating the correct option yields: 'The 20% increase WAS exclusively realized by large corporate retailers while small retail businesses suffered severe economic declines.' This completely undermines the planner's conclusion.
A necessary assumption is a statement that MUST be true for the argument to hold. If its logical opposite destroys the argument, it is the required assumption.

Key Concept

Applying the Negation Technique to Scope Shifts (Whole-to-Part)
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 1447Question →

University administrator: Our alumni donation rate has dropped by 15% since we replaced our quarterly printed alumni magazine with a monthly email newsletter. Therefore, to restore our alumni donation rate to its previous level, we must immediately return to sending the printed magazine.

Statement: To logically evaluate the validity of the administrator's argument, it is necessary to determine whether there has been a general economic downturn affecting the disposable income of alumni since the switch to the email newsletter.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: True

Answer

The statement is True.
The statement correctly identifies a piece of information that is crucial for evaluating the argument. The administrator observes a correlation (the format changed, and donations dropped) and assumes a causal relationship (the format change caused the drop). In causal arguments, discovering an alternate cause weakens the conclusion, while eliminating an alternate cause strengthens it. By applying the Variance Test, if an economic downturn did occur (Yes), the drop in donations is likely due to alumni having less disposable income, which severely weakens the claim that returning to print will fix the issue. If an economic downturn did not occur (No), this alternate cause is eliminated, strengthening the administrator's causal claim. Because polar opposite answers to the question yield opposite logical effects on the argument's validity, the statement is a necessary point of evaluation.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core argument, including the premises and the main conclusion.
Premise: Donation rates dropped 15% after switching from print to email. Conclusion: Returning to print will restore donation rates.
Evaluating an argument first requires isolating the causal relationship the author assumes.
2
Identify the flaw or assumption in the argument's reasoning.
The argument assumes that the change in publication format is the sole cause of the drop in donations, ignoring other potential factors (a correlation vs. causation flaw).
Recognizing causal assumptions is essential for determining what information would strengthen or weaken the conclusion.
3
Apply the Variance Test to the provided statement.
If 'Yes' (an economic downturn occurred), it provides an alternate cause for the drop, weakening the conclusion. If 'No' (no downturn occurred), it eliminates a potential alternate cause, strengthening the conclusion.
The Variance Test definitively proves whether a piece of information is logically necessary to evaluate an argument.

Key Concept

Evaluate the Argument (Variance Test on Alternate Causes)
Question 1448Question →

A city recently installed "smart" traffic lights at all major intersections, which use real-time data to optimize traffic flow and reduce vehicle idling time. Surprisingly, in the six months since the installation of these smart lights, the average commute time during rush hour in the city has increased by 15 percent.

The fact that the new smart traffic lights have virtually eliminated traffic accidents, which were previously the leading cause of rush-hour delays in the city, helps to resolve this apparent discrepancy.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: False

Answer

False, the statement does not help to resolve the apparent discrepancy; it actually deepens the paradox.
The statement is false because the provided fact deepens the mystery rather than explaining it. If the new traffic lights eliminated the leading cause of rush-hour delays, we would expect average commute times to decrease drastically. The fact that commute times instead increased by 15 percent becomes even more contradictory and surprising in light of this new information.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core paradox in the stimulus.
The paradox is that new technology designed to optimize traffic flow and reduce idling has coincided with a surprising 15 percent increase in rush-hour commute times.
Understanding the exact nature of the discrepancy is required before evaluating any potential resolution.
2
Analyze what the provided statement contributes to the scenario.
The statement reveals that the new smart lights successfully eliminated traffic accidents, which used to be the primary cause of delays in the city.
We must determine how this new piece of information interacts with the existing, conflicting facts.
3
Evaluate if the new information explains the surprising outcome.
It does the exact opposite. If the leading cause of delays was eliminated, commute times should have dropped significantly. The 15 percent increase is now much harder to understand.
A valid resolution must provide a mechanism showing how the two seemingly contradictory facts can coexist. A statement that deepens the mystery is a trap and does not resolve the discrepancy.

Key Concept

Eliminating Paradox-Deepening Traps
Question 1449Question →

Corporate governance expert: To prevent the catastrophic financial collapses seen recently, a new regulation requires that a majority of any public corporation's risk-management committee be independent directors—those with no prior financial ties to the company. However, this regulation will likely fail to achieve its primary goal. The most significant financial disasters occurred because risk committees were unaware of the complex financial instruments executives were utilizing. Yet, maintaining true independence from a company almost always precludes a deep, specialized understanding of its highly proprietary operations.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the corporate governance expert's argument depends?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: One cannot reliably become aware of the complex financial instruments utilized by a company's executives without a deep, specialized understanding of that company's highly proprietary operations.

Answer

The assumption that one cannot reliably become aware of the complex financial instruments utilized by executives without a deep, specialized understanding of the company's highly proprietary operations.
The correct answer bridges the precise gap between the premises. The argument states that past disasters were caused by committees being unaware of 'complex financial instruments.' It then states that independent directors lack a deep understanding of 'highly proprietary operations.' To conclude that independent directors will therefore fail to prevent disasters, the author must assume that without understanding those proprietary operations, one cannot be aware of the complex financial instruments. Applying the Negation Test confirms this: if they CAN become aware of the instruments without understanding the proprietary operations, the author's logic completely falls apart.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the conclusion and premises of the argument.
Conclusion: The regulation requiring independent directors will likely fail to prevent financial collapses. Premises: Collapses happen because committees are unaware of complex financial instruments. Independent directors lack a deep understanding of highly proprietary operations.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to identify structural gaps between the evidence provided and the claim made.
2
Identify the conceptual gap or term shift in the argument's logic.
The argument shifts from 'unaware of complex financial instruments' (the problem) to 'lack a deep understanding of highly proprietary operations' (the trait of independent directors).
In LSAT Logical Reasoning, arguments frequently equate two different concepts. Finding this shift reveals the unstated assumption connecting them.
3
Formulate the missing link (Supporter Assumption).
The author must believe that lacking an understanding of highly proprietary operations prevents someone from being aware of the complex financial instruments.
To conclude that independent directors will fail for the same reasons past committees failed, their specific deficiency must directly cause that historical failure point.
4
Evaluate the choices using the Negation Technique.
Negating the correct answer yields: 'One can become aware of the instruments without understanding the proprietary operations.' If this is true, the independent directors' limitation doesn't matter, and the argument's conclusion collapses.
The Negation Technique is the definitive test for a Necessary Assumption. If the negated form of an option destroys the argument, that option is the correct necessary assumption.

Key Concept

Bridging conceptual gaps (Supporter Assumptions) and applying the Negation Technique to test logical necessity.
Question 1450Question →

Match each of the following flawed arguments to the abstract description that most accurately identifies its reasoning error concerning percentages and absolute numbers.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Bicycle thefts accounted for 15% of all reported property crimes in the city this year, up from 5% a decade ago. Therefore, there are more bicycle thefts now than there were ten years ago.
Hospital Alpha treated 400 patients for respiratory illness this month, while Hospital Beta treated only 80. Thus, a patient at Hospital Alpha is more likely to be treated for a respiratory illness than a patient at Hospital Beta.
Zeta Tech's share of the global smartphone market fell from 30% to 20% over the last three years. This shows that Zeta Tech is manufacturing fewer smartphones than it did three years ago.
The city's public library received a record 10,000 new book donations this year. Consequently, donated books must represent a larger percentage of the library's total acquisitions this year than in previous years.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The bicycle theft argument pairs with the proportion-to-quantity increase flaw; the hospital argument pairs with the quantity-to-rate flaw; the smartphone argument pairs with the share-to-quantity decrease flaw; the library argument pairs with the quantity-to-proportion increase flaw.
Each argument represents one of four directional variations of the percentage vs. number flaw. By precisely identifying whether the premise offers absolute data or proportional data, and whether the conclusion claims an absolute result or a proportional result, you can map each argument to its abstract description.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the premise and conclusion of the first argument.
Premise: Proportion increased (5% to 15%). Conclusion: Absolute number increased.
Identifying the shift from a relative metric to an absolute metric isolates the specific percentage-to-number flaw.
2
Analyze the premise and conclusion of the second argument.
Premise: Absolute number is higher (400 vs 80). Conclusion: Likelihood (rate) is higher.
This reveals the inverse flaw: moving improperly from an absolute count to a comparative proportion.
3
Analyze the premise and conclusion of the third argument.
Premise: Market share (proportion) decreased. Conclusion: Absolute number decreased.
This mirrors the first flaw but tests the downward trajectory, confusing a shrinking slice of the pie with a shrinking absolute size of the slice.
4
Analyze the premise and conclusion of the fourth argument.
Premise: Absolute number is at a record high. Conclusion: Percentage must be larger.
This confirms the final mapping, showing an improper leap from a high quantity to a high relative percentage.

Key Concept

Percentages vs. Numbers Flaws
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Question 1451Question →

Public Health Official: Over the last decade, the municipality of Veridia has seen a 25 percent increase in residents diagnosed with chronic insomnia. During this same period, surveys indicate that the average daily screen time for adults in Veridia rose by over 30 percent. Because no other major public health trends were identified, this surge in screen time must be the primary factor driving the rise in chronic insomnia.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthen the official's argument? (Select all that apply)

Select all that apply

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Neurological research demonstrates that the specific wavelengths of light emitted by modern digital devices strongly suppress the human brain's production of sleep-inducing hormones.; Neighboring municipalities with similar demographics to Veridia, but where average screen time remained stable over the last decade, recorded no significant increase in chronic insomnia.

Answer

The correct options are the one describing the biological mechanism of blue light suppressing sleep hormones, and the one showing that neighboring municipalities without an increase in screen time saw no increase in insomnia.
The official concludes that increased screen time caused the rise in insomnia based purely on their concurrent increase over a decade. To strengthen a causal argument, one must bolster the specific link between the purported cause and the effect. The correct answers achieve this in two classic ways: first, by providing a biological mechanism that explains exactly how the cause produces the effect (blue light suppressing hormones); and second, by showing a control group where the cause is absent and the effect is simultaneously absent (neighboring towns with stable screen time and stable insomnia rates).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the stimulus to identify the premises and the main conclusion.
Premises: Insomnia increased by 25% and screen time increased by 30% simultaneously. Conclusion: The surge in screen time is the primary factor driving the rise in chronic insomnia.
Understanding the exact causal claim being made is necessary to evaluate what evidence would logically strengthen it.
2
Identify the logical gaps in the official's causal argument.
The argument assumes that a correlation between two trends implies causation, ignoring potential alternative causes, the possibility of reverse causation, and the need for a mechanism linking the two.
Strengthening a causal argument requires finding evidence that directly addresses and bridges these logical vulnerabilities.
3
Evaluate the answer choices for standard strengthening properties.
Look for options that provide a causal mechanism, show the effect is absent when the cause is absent (control group), or explicitly rule out alternative explanations. Avoid options that provide alternative causes or demonstrate reverse causation.
These are the recognized methods for validating a causal relationship in logical reasoning assessments.

Key Concept

Strengthening Causal Arguments
Question 1452Question →

Tourism Director: It is impossible for a coastal region's tourism industry to thrive during the winter off-season unless there is a robust calendar of indoor cultural festivals. Over the past three years, our regional tourism board has heavily subsidized local arts organizations, increasing the number of winter events by 40 percent and thereby ensuring that our winter calendar is packed with highly publicized indoor cultural festivals. It is virtually guaranteed, then, that our region's winter tourism industry will soon see a dramatic revitalization and begin to thrive.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the tourism director's reasoning?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: It takes for granted that because a prerequisite for a certain outcome has been met, that outcome is guaranteed to occur.

Answer

It takes for granted that because a prerequisite for a certain outcome has been met, that outcome is guaranteed to occur.
The correct answer accurately identifies the conditional reasoning error in the stimulus. The director states that a robust festival calendar is a requirement ('impossible... unless') for a thriving winter tourism industry. The director then demonstrates that this requirement has been met and concludes that the tourism industry will therefore thrive. This treats a necessary condition (a prerequisite) as a sufficient condition (a guarantee).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structural logic of the director's first sentence.
The phrase 'impossible... unless' creates a conditional relationship: if the winter tourism industry is to thrive, then there must be a robust calendar of indoor cultural festivals. The festival calendar is a necessary condition (a prerequisite).
Identifying conditional indicator words is crucial for mapping the argument's core structure.
2
Examine the premises provided to support the conclusion.
The director establishes that the necessary condition has been met: the tourism board has ensured that the winter calendar is packed with festivals.
Understanding what facts the author introduces helps determine how they are trying to prove their point.
3
Evaluate the conclusion drawn from the premises.
The director concludes that the winter tourism industry is 'virtually guaranteed' to thrive.
Comparing the premises to the conclusion reveals the logical leap.
4
Identify the logical disconnect between the premises and conclusion.
The director commits a conditional reasoning flaw by assuming that fulfilling a necessary condition (having the festivals) is sufficient to guarantee the result (thriving tourism).
A necessary condition is required for an outcome, but meeting it does not guarantee the outcome, as other necessary conditions (like affordable flights or good weather) may still be unmet.

Key Concept

Identifying Conditional Reasoning Flaws (Confusing Necessary and Sufficient Conditions)
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Question 1453Question →

Match each candidate assumption statement on the left with its precise logical negation on the right. Accurately formulating these negations is a crucial step when applying the Negation Technique to evaluate Necessary Assumption questions on the LSAT.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Every successful candidate in the election received campaign donations.
Some of the newly discovered artifacts date back to the third century.
Implementing the new protocol is the only way to secure the network.
Most of the board members will vote in favor of the merger.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The correct pairings match each statement's quantifier with its mutually exclusive and exhaustive opposite: 'Every' matches with 'At least one... did not'; 'Some' matches with 'None'; 'the only way' matches with 'can be secured without'; and 'Most' matches with 'Half or fewer'.
To apply the Negation Technique accurately, one must find the exact logical opposite of a statement. The logical opposite of 'all/every' is 'not all' (at least one is not). The logical opposite of 'some' (at least one) is 'none' (zero). The logical opposite of a necessary condition ('the only way') is showing the outcome can happen without it. The logical opposite of 'most' (51% to 100%) is 'half or fewer' (0% to 50%).

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the primary logical quantifier or conditional indicator in each statement.
The key indicators are 'Every' (Left 1), 'Some' (Left 2), 'the only way' (Left 3), and 'Most' (Left 4).
The Negation Technique relies on finding the precise mathematical or logical boundary of these indicators.
2
Determine the formal logical opposite for each indicator.
All -> Not All (At least one is not). Some (at least one) -> None. Only way (Necessary) -> Not Necessary. Most (>50%) -> Half or fewer (<=50%).
Logical negation must divide all possibilities into exactly two mutually exclusive outcomes without any overlap.
3
Match the original statements to the right items that reflect these logical opposites.
Left 1 pairs with Right 2. Left 2 pairs with Right 4. Left 3 pairs with Right 3. Left 4 pairs with Right 1.
These pairings provide the exact negations required to test necessary assumptions without committing a flawed negation.

Key Concept

Applying the Negation Technique to Formal Logic Quantifiers
Question 1454Question →

Public Health Official: Demographic data reveal a strong positive correlation between a municipality's per capita expenditure on public parks and the average self-reported life satisfaction of its residents. Critics of increased park funding argue that this does not prove that parks increase life satisfaction. They posit instead that wealthier municipalities—which inherently feature higher baseline life satisfaction due to economic security—simply have more surplus tax revenue to allocate to parks. However, this critique is flawed. A recent comprehensive analysis demonstrated that even among municipalities with identical median household incomes, those that subsequently increase their park funding see a corresponding rise in aggregate life satisfaction metrics. Therefore, it is evident that increasing expenditure on public parks directly causes an increase in residents' life satisfaction.

Which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the public health official's reasoning?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: It concludes that a specific causal relationship exists solely on the grounds that one proposed alternative explanation for a statistical correlation has been discredited.

Answer

The option stating that the argument concludes a causal relationship exists solely because one alternative explanation has been discredited.
The public health official observes a correlation, addresses one specific alternative explanation (wealth), and then concludes the causal claim is definitively proven. This is flawed because ruling out one alternative explanation does not rule out all other potential confounding variables (like community engagement or demographic shifts) that could be causing the increase in life satisfaction.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structure of the argument.
Premise 1: Correlation between park funding and life satisfaction. Premise 2: Critics suggest a third variable (wealth) causes both. Premise 3: A study controls for wealth and still finds the correlation. Conclusion: Park funding directly causes increased life satisfaction.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to isolate how the premises support the causal conclusion.
2
Identify the logical leap between the premises and the conclusion.
The official successfully rules out 'wealth' as the third variable. However, ruling out one alternative explanation does not rule out all other alternative explanations (e.g., civic engagement, health initiatives, or age demographics).
Finding the gap in reasoning points directly to the logical flaw.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the identified flaw.
The correct option abstractly describes this exact leap: establishing a causal relationship merely because one specific alternate explanation was defeated.
The correct answer in a Flaw question must accurately describe a reasoning error that actually occurs in the stimulus.

Key Concept

Causal Flaws: Overlooking Alternative Explanations
Question 1455Question →

Anthropologist: The discovery of ceremonial obsidian blades in the ruins of the agrarian Vaelian civilization, which flourished 3,000 years ago, proves that the Vaelians engaged in long-distance commerce. The only known geological source of this specific type of obsidian is Mount Cinder, located nearly 400 miles away from the Vaelian settlements. Given that the Vaelians were deeply tied to their farmlands and lacked the means for long-distance travel, they must have acquired these blades by trading with nomadic groups.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the anthropologist's argument?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: Geological surveys indicate that a massive prehistoric river once flowed directly from Mount Cinder to the Vaelian valley, depositing large quantities of obsidian boulders throughout the region.

Answer

The option stating that a massive prehistoric river deposited obsidian boulders throughout the Vaelian region.
The anthropologist's argument relies on the assumption that if the Vaelians couldn't travel to the obsidian source, they must have relied on other humans (nomads) to bring it to them. The correct answer introduces a third, unconsidered possibility: natural geological forces (a prehistoric river) transported the raw material to the Vaelians' location long before they needed it. If the stones were already in their valley, no trade network was necessary, which destroys the author's conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
Conclusion: The Vaelians must have acquired the obsidian blades by trading with nomadic groups.
This establishes the core claim that the question asks you to undermine.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
Premises: (1) Obsidian blades were found in Vaelian ruins. (2) The only source of this obsidian is 400 miles away. (3) Vaelians could not travel long distances themselves.
Understanding the evidence reveals the logical gap.
3
Identify the logical gap (assumption) between the premises and the conclusion.
The anthropologist assumes that human transport (specifically trade) is the ONLY way the obsidian could cross the 400-mile distance.
Arguments are weakened by exposing and attacking their unstated assumptions.
4
Evaluate the options to find one that attacks this assumption.
The option describing a prehistoric river shows that natural geological forces, not human trade, could have moved the stones, severing the link between the premises and the conclusion.
Providing a plausible alternate explanation is the most common way to weaken a causal or explanatory argument.

Key Concept

Alternative Explanations in Argument Evaluation
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Question 1456Question →

Consider the argument below regarding historical artifacts:

A historical artifact is considered authentic only if its provenance can be verified through continuous independent documentation. The recently discovered chalice lacks any continuous independent documentation of its provenance. Therefore, the chalice cannot be considered an authentic historical artifact.

The argument above logically depends on the assumption that any historical artifact whose provenance can be verified through continuous independent documentation is considered authentic.

Show answer & explanation

Answer: False

Answer

False
The statement is false because the provided argument is already logically valid and complete. It correctly uses the contrapositive of its stated premise (Authentic -> Provenance Verified) to safely reach the conclusion (~Provenance Verified -> ~Authentic). It does not require or rely on the reversed assumption that verifiable provenance guarantees authenticity.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Translate the argument's first sentence into a formal conditional relationship.
The phrase 'only if' introduces a necessary condition. The relationship is: Authentic -> Provenance Verified.
Identifying the exact conditional relationship is required to evaluate the logical structure of the argument.
2
Analyze the second premise and the conclusion.
The argument states that the chalice does not have verified provenance (~Provenance Verified), and concludes it is not authentic (~Authentic).
This maps the specific scenario to the established conditional rule.
3
Evaluate the validity of the argument's deduction.
The argument correctly applies the contrapositive principle (~Provenance Verified -> ~Authentic). The reasoning is completely sound without any missing links.
A logically sound argument relies only on its stated premises and valid rules of inference; it does not require any additional unstated assumptions.
4
Analyze the assumption provided in the statement.
The statement claims the argument relies on the assumption 'Provenance Verified -> Authentic'. Because the argument is already valid, it does not rely on this reversed condition.
This confirms that the provided statement incorrectly evaluates the logical dependencies of the argument.

Key Concept

Evaluating whether a conditional argument requires an additional assumption, and distinguishing between valid deductions (contrapositive) and invalid assumptions (illegal reversal).
Question 1457Question →

Match each paradoxical situation on the left with the statement on the right that most logically resolves the apparent discrepancy.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

A hospital facing a severe shortage of qualified nurses recently decreased the starting salaries for its newly hired nurses.
Traffic congestion in a city's downtown area worsened after the introduction of a popular free public bicycle-sharing program.
The release of an expensive premium version of a productivity app caused a sudden, massive surge in sales of the previously stagnant basic version.
Despite a massive increase in residential solar panel installations following a new subsidy, the total residential electricity drawn from the city's main grid did not decrease.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

The hospital paradox is resolved by the tuition program; the traffic paradox by the lane removal and user demographics; the app sales paradox by the shifted perception of value; and the solar panel paradox by the increase in overall energy consumption.
Each correct match provides a new piece of information that bridges the gap between the two seemingly contradictory facts presented in the paradox. By addressing alternative compensation, capacity reduction, psychological price anchoring, and behavioral rebound effects, the correct statements fully resolve their respective discrepancies.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the hospital labor shortage paradox.
The discrepancy is lowering wages during a shortage. The resolution must provide an alternative incentive that outweighs the lower pay, which matches the tuition coverage program.
To resolve a labor paradox, we need a factor that increases the job's attractiveness independent of the base salary.
2
Analyze the traffic and bicycle program paradox.
The discrepancy is more alternative transport leading to worse traffic. The resolution must show cars were not reduced while road capacity was, which matches the lane removal and pedestrian usage statement.
A paradox involving worsened conditions despite an apparent solution usually means the solution actively harmed the existing infrastructure or didn't target the actual source of the problem.
3
Analyze the app sales paradox.
The discrepancy is a new expensive product boosting sales of an old stagnant one. The resolution must explain a change in consumer behavior toward the old product, matching the shift in value perception.
When a new product impacts the sales of an existing product, it typically alters the comparative landscape or consumer psychology.
4
Analyze the solar panel paradox.
The discrepancy is increased solar capacity not reducing grid reliance. The resolution must explain an offset in the savings, matching the behavioral shift of using high-consumption appliances.
A paradox where increased efficiency or capacity fails to yield expected reductions often points to a simultaneous increase in usage (a rebound effect).

Key Concept

Identifying the Apparent Discrepancy and bridging the gap with new, logically sufficient information that allows both original facts to coexist.
Question 1458Question →

Public Health Official: Ten years ago, asthma cases represented 8%8\% of all respiratory-related emergency room visits in our county. Last year, asthma cases represented 18%18\% of all respiratory-related emergency room visits. Clearly, a greater number of people in our county are suffering from severe asthma attacks requiring emergency care than a decade ago.

Which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the public health official's reasoning?

Show answer & explanation

Answer: treats an increase in the percentage of a whole as definitive evidence of an increase in the absolute number of items in that category

Answer

The correct answer is the option stating that the argument treats an increase in the percentage of a whole as definitive evidence of an increase in the absolute number of items in that category.
The official's argument concludes that the absolute number of asthma cases has increased simply because asthma now makes up a larger percentage of a specific group (respiratory ER visits). This is logically flawed because it ignores changes to the total size of that group. If the total number of respiratory-related emergency room visits plummeted over the last decade, 18%18\% of the new, smaller total could represent a smaller absolute number of patients than 8%8\% of the old, much larger total.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the premises provided in the stimulus.
The premise states that the percentage of respiratory-related ER visits attributed to asthma increased from 8%8\% to 18%18\% over a decade.
To establish the factual basis the official is using for their argument.
2
Identify the conclusion drawn by the official.
The official concludes that the absolute number of asthma cases requiring emergency care has increased.
To determine exactly what the argument is trying to prove.
3
Evaluate the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion.
The premises provide information exclusively about proportions (percentages of a specific category), but the conclusion makes a definitive claim about absolute numbers (a greater number of people).
To locate the structural flaw in the reasoning.
4
Determine what information is missing that makes the conclusion invalid.
The argument ignores the overall size of the baseline group (total respiratory ER visits). If total respiratory ER visits dropped dramatically, 18%18\% of the new, smaller total could be fewer actual patients than 8%8\% of the old, larger total.
To precisely define the percentage vs. number fallacy occurring in the stimulus.

Key Concept

Percentages vs. Numbers Flaws
Question 1459Question →

Match each argument (stimulus) with the supporter assumption that is logically necessary to bridge the gap between its premises and its conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

If a legal code prioritizes restorative justice over punitive measures, it requires a robust network of community mediators. The nation of Oakhaven lacks the funding necessary to train or employ community mediators. Therefore, Oakhaven's legal code will inevitably fail to lower the national recidivism rate.
A dietary supplement can only be marketed as "performance-enhancing" if clinical trials demonstrate a significant increase in muscular endurance without elevating resting heart rate. The novel compound XT-4 increases endurance by 15%, but trials show it elevates the resting heart rate of users. Thus, XT-4 cannot be patented.
In the genre of abstract expressionism, a painting's artistic merit is determined exclusively by the emotional resonance of its chaotic forms. Sorel's latest canvas exhibits immaculate brushwork but fails to evoke any visceral reaction from its audience. Clearly, Sorel's canvas will not be inducted into the modern art museum's permanent collection.
Societal stability requires a populace that explicitly trusts its governing institutions. Frequent political scandals predictably erode this trust by portraying leaders as self-serving. Since the current administration has been plagued by continuous scandals, the national economy is destined to enter a severe recession.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Connect each argument to the assumption that explicitly links the orphaned concept in the conclusion back to the logical chain established in the premises.
Each correct pairing successfully identifies the unstated premise required to make the argument's conclusion logically follow. In supporter assumption questions, the conclusion always introduces a new concept that did not appear in the premises. The correct assumption must explicitly link this new conclusion concept to the concepts established in the premises, effectively 'closing the gap' in the author's reasoning.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Isolate the conclusion and the premises for each argument.
Identified the final claim and the supporting evidence for all four stimuli.
Structural breakdown is required to spot the exact point where the argument skips a logical step.
2
Identify the 'rogue' or 'orphaned' term in each conclusion.
Found 'fail to lower recidivism' (Argument 1), 'cannot be patented' (Argument 2), 'inducted into permanent collection' (Argument 3), and 'severe recession' (Argument 4).
A valid supporter assumption must mention the new concept introduced in the conclusion.
3
Identify the final proven point in each premise chain.
Found 'cannot prioritize restorative justice' (1), 'cannot be marketed as performance-enhancing' (2), 'lacks artistic merit' (3), and 'loss of societal stability' (4).
The assumption must connect the rogue conclusion term specifically to the end of the premise chain.
4
Match the argument to the assumption that correctly links the two elements using proper conditional or causal direction.
Successfully paired all four arguments with their corresponding linking assumptions.
Verifying the conditional direction (e.g., ensuring a necessary condition is mapped correctly) confirms the assumption validates the argument.

Key Concept

Bridging Gap (Supporter) Assumptions
Question 1460Question →

Match each argument with the sufficient assumption that logically guarantees its main conclusion.

Click a left item, then click its matching right item

Items

Only entities that synthesize proteins can be classified as alive. Prions consist solely of misfolded proteins and lack the cellular machinery to synthesize anything. Therefore, prions are incapable of biological evolution.
Expanding the public transit system requires significant increases in municipal funding. The upcoming referendum, if passed, will strictly cap property taxes. Consequently, if the referendum passes, the public transit system will not be expanded.
A valid legal contract requires mutual consideration. The agreement between the corporation and the intern involved the exchange of labor for experience, but no monetary compensation was provided. Thus, the agreement is not a valid legal contract.
Historically, revolutionary scientific theories are initially rejected by the academic establishment. Dr. Vance's new theory of quantum gravity has been warmly embraced by all major physics journals. Therefore, Dr. Vance's theory is incorrect.
The mayor's proposal will reduce traffic congestion in the downtown area. Any proposal that reduces traffic congestion will ultimately improve the city's air quality. Therefore, the city council will definitively approve the mayor's proposal.

Matches

Show answer & explanation

Answer

Argument 1 pairs with 'Only entities classified as alive...', Argument 2 pairs with 'Municipal funding cannot...', Argument 3 pairs with 'An agreement lacks...', Argument 4 pairs with 'No scientific theory is correct...', and Argument 5 pairs with 'The city council approves...'
Each correct pairing connects an argument to the specific conditional statement that logically bridges the gap between its premises and its conclusion. By translating the text into formal logic (e.g., identifying contrapositives or mapping conditional chains), each matched assumption provides the exact sufficient condition required to make its corresponding argument 100% deductively valid.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the prion argument to isolate the missing logical link.
The premises prove prions are 'not alive'. The conclusion states they are 'incapable of evolution'. The required bridge is 'not alive -> incapable of evolution' or its contrapositive 'capable of evolution -> alive'.
Identifying the exact deductive gap is the first step in recognizing a sufficient assumption.
2
Analyze the referendum argument's conditional logic.
Premises: Expand -> Increase Funding. Referendum -> Capped Taxes. Conclusion: Referendum -> Not Expand. We must bridge 'Capped Taxes' to 'Not Increase Funding'.
Chaining conditional statements reveals precisely where the argument's logic breaks down.
3
Identify the missing trigger in the contract argument.
We need to prove the agreement lacks mutual consideration to invoke the rule that it is not a valid contract. The assumption must state that 'no monetary compensation' guarantees a 'lack of mutual consideration'.
Sufficient assumptions often serve to trigger a pre-existing conditional premise.
4
Evaluate the contrapositives in the scientific theory argument.
Vance's theory was not rejected, so it is not revolutionary. To conclude it is incorrect, we need 'Not revolutionary -> Incorrect'. This is the contrapositive of 'Correct -> Revolutionary' (No theory is correct unless it is revolutionary).
Translating 'unless' statements into standard 'if-then' conditional formatting is necessary to test validity.
5
Complete the causal/conditional chain for the mayor's proposal.
The premises lead to the fact that the proposal will improve air quality. To conclude approval, the assumption must state that improving air quality is sufficient to guarantee council approval.
Linking the final derived premise to the conclusion is the standard method for solving bridging assumption questions.

Key Concept

Identifying deductive gaps and supplying the exact formal logic conditional (or its contrapositive) that makes the conclusion 100% valid.
PreviousPage 73 / 198Next
All practice questions — LSAT | Examkin