Strengthen

49 soru

Soru 21Soru →

Financial analyst: In the city of Veridia, the vacancy rate for commercial office spaces has doubled over the past three years. Surprisingly, the average asking rent for available office spaces in the city has increased by 15% during this same period. This rent increase is undoubtedly driven by landlords aggressively renovating their vacant properties to premium 'Class A' status, which naturally commands a higher market price.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the financial analyst's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The commercial properties that became vacant over the past three years were almost exclusively older, lower-tier office spaces that previously commanded the lowest rents in the city.

Cevap

The option stating that the properties that became vacant were almost exclusively older, lower-tier office spaces that previously commanded the lowest rents in the city.
The correct answer strengthens the argument by ruling out a statistical alternative cause. If the properties that recently became vacant were the cheapest in the city, adding them to the 'available' pool should have dragged the average asking rent down. The fact that the average went up by 15% instead means that the asking prices for these newly vacant spaces must have been raised dramatically. This strongly validates the analyst's conclusion that the landlords actively renovated these spaces to command higher prices.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the core components of the argument.
Premises: Vacancy doubled, but average asking rent of available spaces increased by 15%. Conclusion: Landlords are renovating vacant spaces to premium status.
Understanding the exact causal claim and the evidence provided is necessary to identify gaps in the reasoning.
2
Identify the logical gap or vulnerability in the argument.
The argument assumes a causal relationship (renovations caused the rent increase) based on statistical data. However, the average rent of available spaces could mathematically increase simply if the newly vacant spaces were already the most expensive ones in the city.
Finding alternative explanations for the evidence is the primary way to evaluate and ultimately strengthen LSAT causal/statistical arguments.
3
Select the option that eliminates the alternative explanation.
The correct option establishes that the newly vacant properties were originally the cheapest. This removes the mathematical artifact as an alternative explanation, leaving the author's causal explanation (renovations) as the most logical reason the average increased.
Ruling out a highly plausible alternative cause is one of the most powerful ways to strengthen an argument on the LSAT.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening causal arguments by ruling out statistical artifacts or alternative causes.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 22Soru →

Archaeologist: Fragments of distinctively glazed pottery, known to have been produced exclusively in the coastal city of Aethel around 500 BCE, have been discovered in the ruins of the inland city of Bael, located 300 miles away across a harsh desert. Bael was founded around 450 BCE. From this, we can conclude that merchants from Aethel must have traveled directly across the desert to trade their pottery with the inhabitants of Bael.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most strengthen the archaeologist's argument? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Extensive surveys of ancient settlements that could have served as intermediaries between Aethel and Bael have found no evidence of this distinctive pottery.; The only geographical alternative to the desert route between Aethel and Bael was a coastal path that was entirely submerged by rising sea levels prior to 450 BCE.

Cevap

The correct statements are the one eliminating intermediary settlements and the one ruling out an alternative coastal route.
To strengthen the archaeologist's conclusion that Aethel merchants traveled directly across the desert to trade, we must rule out alternative ways the pottery could have arrived. The statement eliminating intermediary settlements rules out indirect trade via middlemen. The statement ruling out the coastal path ensures that if trade happened, it must have been across the desert. Both independently increase the plausibility of the main conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and premises of the argument.
Premises: Pottery exclusively from Aethel (500 BCE) was found in Bael (founded 450 BCE), 300 miles away across a desert. Conclusion: Aethel merchants traveled directly across the desert to trade with Bael.
Understanding the core argument structure is required to evaluate logical gaps.
2
Identify logical gaps or unstated assumptions in the argument.
The argument assumes that the trade was direct (not through middlemen), that the route was across the desert (not another path), and that the pottery arrived via trade (not by migrating settlers).
Strengthening an argument often involves providing evidence that bridges a gap or rules out alternative explanations.
3
Evaluate each option against the identified logical gaps.
The option about finding no pottery in intermediary settlements rules out indirect trade. The option about the flooded coastal path rules out an alternative route. Both bridge logical gaps.
To strengthen the conclusion, an option must make the specific scenario proposed by the conclusion more probable.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening an argument by ruling out alternative causal pathways and alternative explanations.
Soru 23Soru →

Anthropologist: Skeletal remains of the prehistoric Xanti people show remarkably low rates of tooth decay, despite their diet consisting primarily of starchy, carbohydrate-rich tubers known to promote dental cavities. The Xanti lived in an area abundant with the mesic tree, and fossilized resin from this tree was frequently found on their teeth. Therefore, the Xanti's habit of chewing mesic resin likely protected their teeth from decay.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the anthropologist's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Skeletal remains of neighboring prehistoric populations who consumed the same starchy tubers but lacked access to mesic trees exhibit extremely high rates of tooth decay.

Cevap

The statement regarding neighboring prehistoric populations lacking access to mesic trees but exhibiting high rates of tooth decay.
The argument concludes that chewing mesic resin caused the low tooth decay among the Xanti people, despite a high-carbohydrate diet. The correct answer strengthens this causal claim by providing a comparison group: a similar population with the same high-carbohydrate diet but without the mesic resin, who suffered from severe tooth decay. Showing that the expected negative effect occurs when the proposed protective cause is absent is a classic way to strengthen a causal relationship.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's conclusion and premises.
Conclusion: Chewing mesic resin protected the Xanti's teeth from decay. Premises: The Xanti had low tooth decay despite a cavity-promoting starchy diet, and mesic resin was found on their teeth.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to spot the causal claim and the gap in the reasoning.
2
Analyze the logical gap in the argument.
The argument assumes a direct causal relationship between the resin and the lack of decay, without ruling out other factors like regional genetics or alternative dietary elements.
Strengthening a causal argument usually requires ruling out alternative causes or demonstrating the cause-and-effect relationship in a comparative scenario.
3
Evaluate the choices to find evidence that supports the causal link.
The option describing a neighboring population acts as a control group, showing that without the resin (cause absent), severe tooth decay occurs (expected effect).
This directly bolsters the causal claim by verifying that the starchy diet does indeed cause decay in similar populations unless the mesic resin is present.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments (Cause without Effect / Control Group)
Soru 24Soru →

A university study found that students who study in the library's new Silent Zone score significantly higher on exams than students who study in their own dorm rooms. Based on this correlation, the university administration concludes that the quiet environment of the Silent Zone directly improves students' academic performance. Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the administration's conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Students who previously studied in their dorms saw a significant increase in their exam scores after they began studying exclusively in the Silent Zone.

Cevap

The statement demonstrating that students who previously studied in their dorms saw a significant increase in their exam scores after they began studying exclusively in the Silent Zone.
The argument claims a causal relationship: the quiet environment causes higher scores. However, the evidence is merely a correlation. A classic way to strengthen a causal claim on the LSAT is to rule out an alternate cause. The correct answer does exactly this by showing a before-and-after scenario with the same students. If their scores went up only after moving to the Silent Zone, it rules out the alternate explanation that the library simply attracts students who are already smart, thereby heavily supporting the administration's causal conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's premises and main conclusion.
Premise: Students in the Silent Zone score higher than those in dorms. Conclusion: The quiet environment of the Silent Zone causes this improvement in academic performance.
Understanding the exact causal claim is required to evaluate what evidence would strengthen it.
2
Identify the logical gap or vulnerability in the reasoning.
The argument assumes causation solely based on a correlation. It is vulnerable to alternate explanations, such as the possibility that naturally higher-achieving students simply prefer studying in the library.
Strengthening questions often require patching a specific flaw by ruling out alternate causes.
3
Evaluate the options to find one that bridges this gap.
The correct option shows a clear before-and-after change for the same individuals, isolating the environment as the likely cause and eliminating the alternate explanation of self-selection.
Ruling out alternate causes is a primary, definitive method for strengthening a causal conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments by Ruling Out Alternate Explanations
Soru 25Soru →

Meteorologist: Over the past decade, the coastal city of Port Nola has experienced a significant increase in the frequency of severe winter storms. Many climatologists attribute this anomaly to a recent, unprecedented shift in the offshore warm-water currents. However, historical weather logs from the 1820s reveal that Port Nola experienced a decade of winter storms of identical frequency and severity, despite the offshore currents remaining perfectly stable during that era. Therefore, the recent shift in ocean currents is probably not the primary cause of the current severe winter storms in Port Nola.

Which one of the following, if true, most strongly supports the meteorologist's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: A cyclical atmospheric pressure pattern, which records indicate was the sole driver of the 1820s winter storms, has recently reformed over the Port Nola coast.

Cevap

The correct answer is the option stating that a cyclical atmospheric pressure pattern, which drove the 1820s storms, has recently reformed over Port Nola.
The correct answer strengthens the argument by providing a highly probable alternative cause that bridges both the historical and current events. By establishing that the exact same atmospheric pressure pattern responsible for the 1820s storms has recently re-emerged, it significantly increases the probability that this cyclical pattern—not the recent shift in ocean currents—is the primary cause of the current storms. This effectively defends the author's reasoning against the possibility that the past and present storms had entirely different causes.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the recent shift in ocean currents is probably not the primary cause of the current severe winter storms.
This establishes the target claim we need to strengthen. It is a rejection of a specific causal relationship.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
Premise 1: Climatologists blame the new ocean current shift. Premise 2: In the 1820s, identical storms occurred even though the currents were perfectly stable.
Understanding the evidence reveals the author's logic: because the effect happened in the past without the purported cause, the purported cause isn't responsible now.
3
Identify the logical gap or vulnerability in the reasoning.
The argument assumes that whatever caused the storms in the 1820s must also be the cause today, ignoring the possibility that different factors could cause similar storms in different eras.
To strengthen the argument, we must protect it from this vulnerability.
4
Evaluate the options to find one that bridges the gap.
The option introducing the cyclical atmospheric pressure pattern explicitly connects the cause from the 1820s to the present day.
Providing a verified alternative cause that is actively operating during both time periods strongly diminishes the likelihood that the newly shifted ocean currents are to blame.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments (Alternative Causes)
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 26Soru →

Match each logical argument on the left with the piece of evidence on the right that most strongly bolsters its conclusion.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

A software firm observed a 20% increase in productivity immediately after providing all developers with curved monitors. Management concludes the curved monitors caused the productivity boost.
Urban foxes exhibit significantly higher stress hormone levels than rural foxes. Biologists hypothesize that constant exposure to city traffic noise causes this chronic stress.
A clinical study found that individuals who consume breakfast daily have lower average cholesterol levels than those who skip breakfast. Researchers conclude that eating breakfast actively lowers cholesterol.
Traffic officials noted that intersections equipped with red-light cameras experience more rear-end collisions than intersections without them. They conclude the cameras cause these accidents by prompting abrupt braking.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The arguments logically pair with the evidence that targets their specific causal gaps: the monitor argument pairs with the evidence ruling out other workplace changes; the urban fox argument pairs with the evidence isolating noise from other city factors; the breakfast argument pairs with the evidence controlling for overall lifestyle habits; and the traffic camera argument pairs with the evidence establishing a safer baseline before installation.
Each correct match provides a piece of evidence that directly targets the logical vulnerability of the corresponding argument. They systematically strengthen the causal claims by either eliminating an alternative explanation, establishing a clear chronology to avoid selection bias, or demonstrating that the effect is strictly tied to the presence of the suspected cause.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze each argument to identify the premise, the conclusion, and the logical gap.
Identified that all four arguments assume a causal relationship based on a correlation or a chronological sequence.
Understanding the flaw or assumption in an argument is required before you can identify what evidence would strengthen it.
2
Examine the tech firm argument regarding monitors and productivity.
Paired with the evidence stating no other changes occurred at the firm, as it eliminates alternative causes for the productivity spike.
Causal claims based on sequence (post hoc ergo propter hoc) are strengthened when alternate simultaneous causes are ruled out.
3
Examine the biological argument regarding foxes and urban noise.
Paired with the evidence showing quiet urban areas do not produce stressed foxes, which isolates the noise variable.
Showing that the effect disappears when the specific cause is removed (even when other background factors remain) heavily strengthens a causal claim.
4
Examine the health argument regarding breakfast and cholesterol.
Paired with the evidence showing both groups had similar exercise and fat intake routines.
Correlational studies are vulnerable to third-variable problems. Controlling for other lifestyle factors strengthens the specific correlation.
5
Examine the traffic argument regarding cameras and collisions.
Paired with the evidence showing the camera intersections were actually safer before the cameras were installed.
This rules out reverse causation or selection bias (the idea that high-collision rates caused the cameras to be placed there, rather than the cameras causing the collisions).

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments by Ruling Out Alternatives and Controlling Variables
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 27Soru →

Analyze the four logical arguments below. Each argument contains a specific causal gap or unstated vulnerability. Match each argument to the single piece of new evidence that most robustly strengthens its conclusion by resolving that specific gap.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Tracking data over fifteen years shows the median life expectancy of Alpine marmots rising sharply, mirroring a localized collapse in the golden eagle population. Ecologists assert that the alleviation of direct eagle predation allowed the marmots to achieve longer lifespans.
Following the implementation of aggressive state subsidies for domestic solar panel manufacturing, the nation's volume of fossil fuel imports plummeted by 30%. Policymakers argue these financial incentives were the primary driver of the reduced reliance on traditional energy.
Participants navigating complex logical tasks in rooms illuminated by short-wavelength blue light completed them 15% faster than cohorts in red-lit rooms. Researchers conclude the specific spectral frequency of the light intrinsically accelerates neurological processing speed.
Artifact analysis at an excavation reveals that 85% of recovered cutting implements exhibit asymmetrical micro-abrasions exclusively on their leftward-facing edges. Anthropologists hypothesize this ancient population possessed a disproportionately high rate of left-handedness.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct pairings successfully align each causal gap with the evidence that bridges it: the marmot predation claim with aerial trauma data, the solar policy claim with total energy audits, the light frequency claim with color-neutralization controls, and the anthropology claim with experimental tool replication.
Each correct match directly addresses the critical flaw in its respective argument. The marmot argument is strengthened by directly confirming the mechanism of reduced mortality (aerial ambush). The solar subsidy argument is strengthened by ruling out the most likely alternative causes (lower energy demand or other renewables). The blue light argument is strengthened by a control test that isolates light frequency as the active variable. The tool argument is strengthened by explicitly verifying the mechanical relationship between hand dominance and wear patterns.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the Alpine marmot argument to identify its causal gap.
Identified that the correlation between fewer eagles and longer-living marmots could be coincidental (e.g., caused by better food).
Strengthening a causal claim requires showing that the proposed cause directly produced the effect.
2
Match the marmot argument to the available evidence.
Selected the evidence regarding 'aerial ambush trauma' mortality analyses.
This explicitly links the specific predator mechanism to the exact statistical change in survivorship.
3
Analyze the solar subsidy and blue light arguments for vulnerabilities.
Identified that fossil fuel drops could stem from overall lower energy use, and blue light speed could stem from other factors in the room.
Ruling out alternative causes and utilizing control tests are two primary methods of strengthening causal arguments.
4
Match the solar and blue light arguments to their respective strengthening evidence.
Matched solar with the energy demand audit, and blue light with the color-neutralizing lenses experiment.
The energy audit rules out alternative economic causes, while the lens experiment isolates the visual frequency as the active variable.
5
Evaluate the anthropology argument regarding left-handed tools.
Matched it with the experimental replication evidence.
This bridges the gap by proving the unstated assumption that left-edge wear is physically dictated by left-handed use.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening causal arguments by ruling out alternative explanations, utilizing control groups to isolate variables, and confirming underlying mechanical linkages.
Soru 28Soru →

Medical Researcher: A recent observational study found that individuals who drink green tea on a daily basis have a significantly lower incidence of heart disease compared to those who rarely or never drink it. Green tea is uniquely rich in a specific antioxidant compound known as EGCG. Based on these findings, we can conclude that the consumption of EGCG actively helps to prevent the development of heart disease.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the medical researcher's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: In a separate, controlled trial, participants who were given purified EGCG supplements but did not alter their regular diets exhibited a substantial decrease in indicators of heart disease.

Cevap

The correct answer is the statement showing that purified EGCG supplements, when given to participants without other dietary changes, result in a substantial decrease in indicators of heart disease.
The argument concludes that EGCG causes a reduction in heart disease based on a correlation between drinking green tea (which contains EGCG) and lower heart disease rates. The correct answer isolates the proposed cause (EGCG) from other variables in green tea or the drinkers' lifestyles, demonstrating that EGCG alone leads to a reduction in heart disease indicators. This actively validates the causal mechanism and supports the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The conclusion is that the consumption of EGCG actively helps to prevent the development of heart disease.
Understanding the exact conclusion is necessary to determine what kind of evidence will make it more plausible.
2
Identify the premises and the logical gap in the reasoning.
The argument relies on a correlation between drinking green tea and lower heart disease, noting that green tea contains EGCG. The gap is the assumption that EGCG itself is the cause, ignoring other compounds in the tea or lifestyle habits of the drinkers.
Strengthening a causal argument typically requires addressing its underlying assumptions, such as ruling out alternative causes or isolating the mechanism.
3
Evaluate the options to find one that bridges the gap or validates the causal mechanism.
The correct answer demonstrates that when EGCG is administered by itself in a controlled trial, the health benefit still occurs.
Showing that the hypothesized cause produces the desired effect even when separated from confounding variables strongly validates the causal claim.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening a Causal Argument by Isolating the Variable
Soru 29Soru →

Match each logical argument (on the left) with the additional premise (on the right) that most strongly bridges its logical gap and supports its conclusion.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Argument A (Causal): Adults who read fiction regularly have higher empathy scores. Therefore, reading fiction increases a person's empathy.
Argument B (Causal/Trend): The city implemented a new recycling program, and total landfill waste decreased by 20% this year. Thus, the recycling program successfully reduced waste.
Argument C (Sampling): A survey of customers at a luxury sports car dealership found that 90% prefer leather seats. Therefore, most car buyers prefer leather seats.
Argument D (Analogy): Implementing a casual dress code boosted employee morale at the local tech startup. A casual dress code will certainly boost morale at the traditional law firm.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

Argument A pairs with ruling out reverse causation. Argument B pairs with ruling out an alternate cause for the trend. Argument C pairs with validating the representativeness of the sample. Argument D pairs with validating the relevant similarities in the analogy.
Each correct match directly patches the specific logical hole in the corresponding argument. Argument A requires defense against reverse causation. Argument B requires defense against alternative explanations for a trend. Argument C requires validation of an unrepresentative sample. Argument D requires validation of an analogy between two vastly different workplaces.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze Argument A to identify its logical vulnerability.
The argument assumes causation from a mere correlation between reading fiction and empathy.
To strengthen a causal claim based on correlation, the best premise will rule out reverse causation or a third variable.
2
Analyze Argument B to identify its logical vulnerability.
The argument assumes the recycling program is the sole cause of the 20% drop in landfill waste.
To strengthen this, we must rule out alternative explanations, such as residents simply producing less trash overall.
3
Analyze Argument C to identify its logical vulnerability.
The argument uses a highly specific, potentially biased sample (luxury car buyers) to make a claim about all car buyers.
To strengthen a conclusion based on a survey, a premise must show that the sample is representative of the whole group.
4
Analyze Argument D to identify its logical vulnerability.
The argument relies on an analogy between a tech startup and a traditional law firm.
To strengthen an analogy, a premise must confirm that the two entities are similar in ways that are relevant to the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening arguments by diagnosing specific logical gaps (causation, sampling, analogies) and supplying premises that directly address those vulnerabilities.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 30Soru →

A local wine shop recently alternated the background music it played, switching between classical music and pop music. The store's records show that on days when classical music was played, the average price of a purchased bottle of wine was 20 percent higher than on days when pop music was played. The store owner concludes that listening to classical music induces customers to purchase more expensive wines.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the store owner's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The average income and demographics of the customers visiting the shop were nearly identical on both classical music days and pop music days.

Cevap

The average income and demographics of the customers visiting the shop were nearly identical on both classical music days and pop music days.
The argument claims a direct causal relationship between the type of music played and the amount of money spent per bottle. A classic way to strengthen a causal claim is to rule out a viable alternate cause. If the customers on classical music days were generally much wealthier than those on pop music days, that wealth difference would be a strong alternate explanation for the higher spending. The correct answer eliminates that alternate cause by stating the demographics and incomes were identical across both scenarios, thereby strengthening the likelihood that the music itself caused the behavior.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion and the primary premise of the argument.
Conclusion: Listening to classical music induces customers to buy more expensive wines. Premise: The average price of wine purchased was 20 percent higher on classical music days than on pop music days.
Understanding the structure of the argument is essential for evaluating its logical strength.
2
Analyze the logical gap in the argument.
The argument assumes a causal relationship (music causes spending) based entirely on a correlation. It fails to consider alternate causes, such as different types of customers visiting the store on different days.
Strengthening a causal argument usually requires eliminating potential alternate explanations.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find one that addresses the logical gap.
The correct choice explicitly rules out the possibility that the demographic or income of the shoppers caused the difference in spending.
By holding the customer base constant, the evidence more strongly points to the music itself as the direct cause of the higher spending.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening causal arguments by ruling out alternate causes
Tahmini Süre:1m 15s
Soru 31Soru →

A local bakery recently replaced its conventional flour with organic flour for all its bread recipes. In the month following this change, the bakery's daily bread sales volume increased by 20 percent. The bakery's owner concludes that the new bread sells better because customers prefer the taste of organic flour over conventional flour.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most strengthen the bakery owner's argument? (Select all that apply)

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: In blind taste tests, the bakery's customers consistently chose the bread made with organic flour over the bread made with conventional flour.; During the month following the change, the bakery did not alter its prices, change its location, or run any new advertising campaigns.

Cevap

The statements that strengthen the argument are: (1) independent evidence showing a taste preference in blind tests, and (2) the elimination of alternative causes such as changes in price or advertising.
The argument concludes that a specific cause (taste preference for organic flour) led to a specific effect (increased sales). The first correct statement strengthens this by providing direct, independent evidence that the proposed mechanism (taste preference) actually exists. The second correct statement strengthens the argument by explicitly ruling out the most common alternative causes for an increase in retail sales (pricing, location, marketing), thereby making the author's proposed cause more likely to be the true one.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion and the premises.
Conclusion: Customers prefer the taste of organic flour. Premise: Bread sales increased by 20 percent after switching to organic flour.
Understanding the structure of the argument is essential to evaluating its logical gaps.
2
Identify the logical gap in the causal argument.
The owner assumes that the correlation between the new flour and increased sales is a direct causal relationship based specifically on taste, ignoring other potential factors.
Causal arguments on the LSAT are vulnerable to alternative causes, reverse causation, or coincidental trends.
3
Evaluate each option to see if it bridges the gap or supports the conclusion.
One option provides direct evidence of taste preference. Another option rules out alternative causes for the sales increase. Both strengthen the argument.
Strengthening a causal argument typically involves confirming the cause-and-effect relationship or eliminating alternative explanations.

Anahtar Kavram

To strengthen a causal argument, you must either provide direct evidence that validates the causal mechanism or rule out plausible alternative causes for the observed effect.
Soru 32Soru →

A recent study of a popular mobile game showed that players who purchased the game's premium subscription played for an average of fifteen hours per week. In contrast, players who did not purchase the subscription played for an average of only four hours per week. Based on these findings, the game's developers concluded that the premium subscription directly causes players to engage more deeply with the game.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the developers' conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Before purchasing the premium subscription, the users in the premium group played the game for an average of exactly four hours per week.

Cevap

The option stating that before purchasing the premium subscription, users in the premium group played for an average of exactly four hours per week.
The developers' argument assumes a causal relationship based strictly on a correlation. A common flaw in this type of reasoning is the possibility of reverse causation—the idea that players who already engaged deeply with the game were naturally the ones who decided to purchase the subscription. The correct answer successfully eliminates this alternative explanation by demonstrating that the premium players actually had low engagement levels prior to their purchase. By ruling out the possibility that the heavy playtime preceded the subscription, the option heavily strengthens the claim that the subscription itself caused the increase in playtime.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's premises and main conclusion.
Premise: Premium subscribers play 15 hours/week, non-subscribers play 4 hours/week. Conclusion: The subscription causes deeper engagement.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to spot the logical gap.
2
Identify the logical flaw or gap in the reasoning.
The developers assume causation from a simple correlation. They ignore the possibility of reverse causation (i.e., that people who already play a lot are simply the ones most likely to buy a subscription).
Strengthen questions often require identifying a vulnerability and finding an answer choice that patches it.
3
Evaluate the options to find one that defends against this vulnerability.
The correct option demonstrates that premium subscribers were not already playing 15 hours a week before they bought the subscription.
Eliminating an alternative explanation (reverse causation) is one of the most robust ways to strengthen a causal conclusion on the LSAT.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments by Ruling Out Alternate Causes (Reverse Causation)
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 33Soru →

Urban Planner: In the city of Oakhaven, the local government recently implemented a "smart traffic light" system at all major intersections in an effort to reduce commute times. Since the system was activated six months ago, the average commute time for residents driving to the city center during peak hours has decreased by 15%. Therefore, it is clear that the new smart traffic light system is responsible for this reduction in commute times.

Which of the following statements, if true, most strengthen the argument? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Over the past six months, the total volume of vehicular traffic entering Oakhaven's city center during peak hours has steadily increased.; Neighboring cities with similar infrastructure that did not install smart traffic lights experienced no decrease in average commute times over the same six-month period.

Cevap

The correct statements are the one indicating an increase in total traffic volume and the one demonstrating that neighboring cities without the system saw no reduction in commute times.
To strengthen a causal argument, one must provide evidence that supports the proposed cause over alternative explanations. The statement showing an increase in traffic volume strengthens the argument by ruling out 'fewer cars on the road' as an alternative cause (in fact, if volume increased but times decreased, the lights must be highly effective). The statement showing no improvement in neighboring cities acts as a control group, demonstrating that where the cause (smart lights) is absent, the effect (reduced commute time) is also absent.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The new smart traffic light system is responsible for the 15% reduction in commute times.
This establishes the core causal claim that must be strengthened.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The system was activated six months ago, and commute times decreased by 15% during that exact same timeframe.
Understanding the evidence reveals that the argument relies entirely on a chronological correlation.
3
Identify the logical gap (flaw) in the argument.
The argument assumes causation based solely on correlation. It fails to account for other factors that might have reduced commute times over the last six months.
To strengthen a causal argument, you must usually patch its core vulnerability by ruling out alternative causes or confirming the cause-and-effect relationship.
4
Evaluate options to find those that bridge the logical gap.
One correct option shows that traffic volume increased (eliminating 'fewer cars' as an alternative cause). The other correct option shows that without the new lights, similar cities saw no improvement (showing cause-without-effect controls).
Both selected options independently bolster the causal claim using standard logical reasoning techniques.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments (Ruling out alternatives and showing control groups)
Soru 34Soru →

For each logical argument presented, identify the specific piece of additional evidence that provides the strongest logical support for its main conclusion.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Meteorology: Farms in the western valley that employed a new cloud-seeding technique received 20% more rainfall this season than their historical average. Therefore, the cloud-seeding technique effectively increases precipitation.
Workplace Tech: A software company found that programmers using a newly designed ergonomic keyboard write code 15% faster than those using standard keyboards. Thus, the new keyboard design improves coding speed.
Linguistics: A newly discovered 12th-century text from the isolated Mountain Kingdom contains several words adopted from the Coastal Empire's language. This indicates that the Mountain Kingdom engaged in extensive economic trade with the Coastal Empire.
Zoology: Researchers observed that migratory birds resting in the Northern Wetlands have a significantly higher survival rate during their journey than those resting in the Southern Marshes. Therefore, the Northern Wetlands provide a more nutrient-rich food supply.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The correct pairings align each argument with the evidence that directly resolves its specific logical vulnerability: ruling out alternative weather causes, eliminating selection bias in typists, bridging the conceptual gap to 'trade', and providing a causal mechanism for bird nutrition.
Each correct piece of evidence successfully targets the unstated assumption or vulnerability in its corresponding argument. By either ruling out alternate causes (as in the weather and typing scenarios), bridging a concept shift (in the language scenario), or establishing a clear mechanism (in the bird scenario), the evidence makes each conclusion significantly more likely to be true.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the Meteorology argument to identify its underlying assumption.
The argument assumes a causal relationship between cloud-seeding and increased rain. It requires evidence that a natural weather anomaly didn't cause the increase.
Causal claims based on historical comparisons must rule out alternative concurrent causes.
2
Evaluate the Workplace Tech argument's vulnerability.
The argument claims the keyboard causes faster typing, ignoring that fast typists might self-select the new tool. Evidence of random assignment perfectly addresses this.
Eliminating selection bias is a primary way to strengthen observational causal claims.
3
Assess the leap in the Linguistics argument.
The argument leaps from 'borrowed language' to 'economic trade'. Evidence showing the borrowed words are commerce-related bridges this gap.
When a conclusion introduces a new specific concept (trade) not present in the premise (language), a strengthener must link the two.
4
Identify the causal gap in the Zoology argument.
The argument attributes survival to 'nutrient-rich food' without evidence. Confirming the presence of uniquely nutritious, energy-dense plants in the specific area bolsters this.
Providing factual backing for an assumed mechanism strengthens a causal explanation.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying and resolving logical gaps (alternate causes, selection bias, concept shifts) to strengthen arguments.
Soru 35Soru →

Linguist: Tarania's indigenous language features a complex tonal system, structurally identical to mainland languages 2,000 miles away, but unlike the non-tonal languages of neighboring islands. Anthropologists argue this tonal system evolved independently due to similar acoustic environments between Tarania and the mainland. However, geological records prove Tarania's environment has always resembled its non-tonal neighbors, not the mainland. Therefore, Tarania's tonal system must have been introduced by ancient mainland settlers who migrated to the island.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the linguist's conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Fundamental linguistic structures, such as a highly complex tonal system, are universally adopted only through long-term demographic integration and not through temporary contact.

Cevap

Fundamental linguistic structures, such as a highly complex tonal system, are universally adopted only through long-term demographic integration and not through temporary contact.
The correct answer strengthens the argument by explicitly ruling out a highly plausible alternative explanation: temporary contact through trade networks. By establishing that such complex linguistic features strictly require long-term demographic integration, it bridges the gap between the observed phenomenon and the author's specific conclusion that settlers permanently migrated.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's core structure (premises and main conclusion).
Premises: The tonal system matches the mainland but not neighbors; it didn't evolve independently via environment because Tarania's environment doesn't match the mainland's. Conclusion: Mainland settlers migrating to Tarania introduced the tonal system.
Understanding the core argument structure is required to isolate the logical gap.
2
Identify the logical gap in the reasoning.
The linguist assumes that ruling out independent environmental evolution leaves permanent migration as the only explanation, ignoring other forms of contact like historical trade.
Strengthening an argument often involves closing unstated gaps or ruling out alternative explanations.
3
Evaluate the options to find one that bridges the gap or rules out an alternative cause.
The option stating that complex tonal systems require long-term demographic integration rather than temporary contact perfectly eliminates the most plausible alternative mechanism (trade).
Ruling out alternative causes directly bolsters the author's proposed causal mechanism.

Anahtar Kavram

Ruling out alternative explanations to strengthen a causal claim.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 36Soru →

Historian: In the seventeenth-century town of Oakhaven, merchant records show a sudden surge in the importation of foreign spices immediately following a prolonged period of severe drought. Some scholars argue this indicates that the town's elite significantly increased their wealth during the drought. However, it is more likely that the drought destroyed local herb crops, forcing residents to rely heavily on imported spices for basic food preservation. Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the historian's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The foreign spices imported during the period following the drought consisted almost entirely of basic preservatives rather than the rare culinary spices traditionally favored by the wealthy.

Cevap

The option stating that the foreign spices imported consisted almost entirely of basic preservatives rather than rare culinary spices.
The correct answer decisively strengthens the historian's argument by providing specific data about the types of spices imported. By confirming that the spices were basic preservatives rather than rare culinary luxuries, it perfectly validates the historian's claim that the imports were for basic food preservation due to crop failure, while simultaneously undermining the scholars' alternative claim that the imports were a display of new elite wealth.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the historian's main conclusion.
The surge in spice imports occurred because the drought destroyed local herbs, forcing residents to use imported spices for basic food preservation.
Understanding the precise claim is necessary to evaluate which piece of evidence best supports it.
2
Identify the opposing alternative explanation presented in the stimulus.
Some scholars argue the surge in imports was caused by the town's elite increasing their wealth and buying luxury goods.
In causal arguments, strengthening often involves ruling out or undermining alternative causes.
3
Evaluate the options to find evidence that supports the historian's specific mechanism over the scholars' alternative.
The correct option shows that the nature of the imported goods (basic preservatives) aligns perfectly with the historian's theory and directly contradicts the scholars' theory (which relies on the assumption of luxury consumption).
Evidence that validates the hypothesized cause-and-effect relationship while ruling out a known alternative provides the most robust support.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening causal arguments by confirming the mechanism and ruling out alternative explanations.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 37Soru →

Ornithologist: Ten years ago, our city implemented a 'Dark Sky' ordinance to reduce nighttime light pollution, which disorients migrating warblers and causes fatal building collisions. Since then, the population of warblers migrating through the city has continued to decline. Critics claim the ordinance failed to protect the birds. However, this is unwarranted. The continued decline is actually caused by the recent, rapid deforestation of the warblers' southern wintering grounds.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to strengthen the ornithologist's argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Populations of bird species that migrate through the city but spend their winters in protected nature reserves have remained stable over the past decade.

Cevap

The option stating that populations of bird species migrating through the city but wintering in protected reserves have remained stable.
The correct answer acts as a scientific control group. If the Dark Sky ordinance had failed, all birds migrating through the city would still be declining. By establishing that other bird species migrating through the exact same city are stable because they winter in protected areas, it proves two things simultaneously: the city's ordinance successfully eliminated the local threat, and the lack of protected wintering grounds is the true variable causing the warblers' decline.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion of the argument.
The ornithologist concludes that the continued decline in the warbler population is caused by southern deforestation, not by a failure of the city's Dark Sky ordinance.
Understanding the precise claim is required to know what needs strengthening.
2
Analyze the evidence and identify the logical gap.
The evidence shows warbler populations are still declining despite the ordinance. The gap is the assumption that the ordinance actually worked and that an entirely different variable (deforestation) is now solely responsible for the decline.
Strengthening often involves closing the gap by validating the assumption or ruling out alternate explanations.
3
Formulate a strengthening strategy.
Look for an answer choice that acts as a control group: a scenario where the birds experience the city's ordinance but do NOT experience the deforestation.
In causal arguments, demonstrating 'cause without effect' or validating a control group effectively isolates the true causal variable.
4
Evaluate the options against the strategy.
The correct answer shows that birds migrating through the city but wintering elsewhere are doing fine, proving the city is safe and the wintering grounds are the problem.
This directly confirms the ornithologist's defense of the ordinance and indictment of the deforestation.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments via Control Groups
Soru 38Soru →

Archaeologists recently discovered a high concentration of grinding stones at a 12,000-year-old settlement in the Zaran Valley, predating known agriculture in the region by 2,000 years. Residue analysis of these stones revealed trace amounts of wild cereal grains. Based on this, the lead researcher concluded that the valley's ancient inhabitants systematically processed and stored wild grains as a primary food source long before crop domestication. Which of the following statements, if true, would most strengthen the researcher's argument? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Microscopic wear patterns on the discovered grinding stones perfectly match those found on tools used exclusively for daily, high-volume grain processing.; Excavations immediately adjacent to the grinding stones revealed large, subterranean clay-lined pits containing massive concentrations of wild cereal pollen.

Cevap

The correct selections are the statement identifying wear patterns indicative of high-volume processing and the statement detailing the discovery of large clay-lined storage pits.
The argument jumps from the mere presence of tools with trace grains to a massive claim about systematic processing, storage, and dietary reliance. The correct answers directly address these leaps. The statement about wear patterns confirms the tools were used heavily and specifically for grains, supporting the 'primary food source' and 'systematic processing' claims. The statement about subterranean pits provides the exact physical evidence needed to validate the 'stored' claim.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The inhabitants systematically processed and stored wild grains as a primary food source.
This is the core claim that must be supported by the correct answer choices.
2
Identify the premises and the logical gap.
Premises: Grinding stones were found, and trace wild grains were on them. Gap: Traces of grain on stones do not guarantee high-volume processing (primary food source) or the existence of storage.
Understanding the gap allows you to find evidence that specifically bridges it.
3
Evaluate each option to see if it independently bridges a critical part of the gap.
The option regarding microscopic wear patterns supports the 'systematic/primary processing' claim. The option regarding clay-lined pits supports the 'storage' claim.
In a multi-select strengthen question, each correct option must independently provide meaningful support to the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying and bridging logical gaps in causal or evidentiary arguments.
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 39Soru →

Match each of the following arguments regarding a city transit authority's transition to electric buses (Left) with the newly discovered piece of evidence (Right) that most effectively strengthens its specific conclusion.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Since the deployment of electric buses on Route 5, daily passenger volume has increased by 15 percent. Commuters must therefore prefer the quieter, smoother ride provided by electric vehicles.
The electric buses have required mechanical servicing far less frequently than the diesel buses they replaced. Thus, electric powertrains are inherently more durable than traditional diesel engines.
Particulate pollution along Route 5 has dropped significantly since the electric fleet began operations. This proves that the retired diesel buses were the primary source of airborne contaminants in the area.
Traffic collisions involving buses on Route 5 have decreased by 30 percent since the transition. Consequently, electric buses must be structurally safer and easier to maneuver in traffic.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

The passenger volume argument pairs with the ticket prices evidence; the mechanical servicing argument pairs with the bus age evidence; the pollution argument pairs with the constant traffic emissions evidence; the collision argument pairs with the driver cohort evidence.
In causal reasoning, an argument is logically strengthened when a plausible alternative cause for the observed effect is eliminated. Because all four arguments share the same contextual scenario, surface-level keyword matching is ineffective. Instead, each correct match pairs a specific conclusion with a premise that directly neutralizes its most critical confounding variable.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the passenger volume argument to identify its causal gap.
The argument assumes ride quality caused the ridership increase, ignoring other potential incentives.
Matching it with the evidence that ticket prices and schedules remained unchanged strengthens the claim by ruling out these prominent economic alternatives.
2
Examine the mechanical servicing argument's assumption regarding durability.
The argument assumes engine type, rather than vehicle age, is the reason for reduced maintenance.
Matching it with the evidence that the diesel buses were newer than the electric ones strongly bolsters the claim by showing the electric buses performed better despite an age disadvantage.
3
Evaluate the pollution argument's causal claim.
It assumes the bus switch was the sole reason for improved air quality, ignoring other local factors.
Matching it with the evidence that other emissions remained steady strengthens the argument by isolating the bus fleet as the single variable responsible for the change.
4
Assess the collision reduction argument.
It assumes the vehicles themselves are safer, ignoring the human element of driving.
Matching it with the evidence that the drivers and their training were identical rules out improved human performance as the cause, heavily supporting the vehicle safety conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening causal arguments by systematically ruling out alternative explanations and isolating the causal variable.
Soru 40Soru →

Anthropologist: Chemical analysis of obsidian blades found at the ancient inland Xoloti settlement perfectly matches the isotopic signature of the coastal Yuma quarry, located 400 miles away across the barren Sunu Desert. Clearly, the Xoloti must have engaged in direct, long-distance trade expeditions with the coastal Yuma people to obtain this material, rather than acquiring it gradually through a chain of intermediate, shorter trade networks involving other settlements.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the anthropologist's argument? Select all that apply.

Geçerli olan tümünü seçin

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Extensive archaeological excavations have found no Yuma obsidian artifacts at the sites of any known ancient settlements located between Xoloti and the coastal Yuma quarry.; Remains of marine fish, which would have spoiled within days of being caught, were frequently buried alongside the obsidian blades at the Xoloti settlement.

Cevap

The correct options are the one noting the absence of obsidian at intermediate settlements and the one describing the presence of highly perishable marine fish at the inland site.
The argument concludes that the obsidian was acquired via direct long-distance expeditions rather than a gradual, intermediate trade network. To strengthen this, we must find evidence that either makes direct expeditions more plausible or makes intermediate trade networks less plausible. The option regarding the lack of artifacts at intermediate sites strengthens the argument by directly undermining the alternative explanation (down-the-line trade). The option regarding perishable marine fish strengthens the argument by showing that transit from the coast was extremely fast, which is consistent with direct expeditions and highly inconsistent with gradual, settlement-to-settlement trade.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion and the premises.
Conclusion: Xoloti acquired obsidian via direct long-distance expeditions, not gradual intermediate networks. Premise: Inland obsidian perfectly matches a coastal quarry 400 miles away.
Understanding the core argument is necessary before evaluating its logical gaps.
2
Identify the core logical gap or vulnerability.
The anthropologist assumes that a 400-mile distance entails direct expeditions, but offers no proof that direct trade is more plausible than a chain of shorter, settlement-to-settlement trades.
Strengthening an argument typically involves bridging its primary logical gap or ruling out alternative explanations.
3
Evaluate options for their impact on the direct vs. intermediate trade hypotheses.
Options that rule out intermediate trade (lack of artifacts at intermediate sites) or require rapid transport (perishable marine fish) support the direct trade conclusion.
Evidence that undermines the alternative cause (gradual trade) directly strengthens the author's preferred cause (direct expeditions).

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening an argument by ruling out alternative explanations and affirming the feasibility of the proposed explanation.
ÖncekiSayfa 2 / 3Sonraki
Strengthen Alıştırma Soruları — LSAT — Sayfa 2 | Examkin