Strategies for Strengthening Prephrases in 'Most Strongly Supported' Questions"

[CharlesWalter]

I've been diligently preparing for the LSAT and have found the 'Most Strongly Supported' questions to be particularly challenging. I understand that the correct answer doesn't need to be proven beyond a doubt but should be highly likely based on the information provided.

I'm looking for more nuanced techniques to enhance my prephrasing approach. How to develop a strong prephrase for 'Most Strongly Supported' questions?

[Luke Haqq]

Hi CharlesWalter!

If you're dealing with a question that asks for what is most strongly supported by the stimulus, that means you're dealing with a must be true question. You comment,

I understand that the correct answer doesn't need to be proven beyond a doubt but should be highly likely based on the information provided.

The correct answer on a must be true question will certainly be in the "proven beyond a doubt" category. The answer choice won't just be highly likely but rather will necessarily be true based on the stimulus.

As a general suggestion rather than a nuanced technique, I think that practice goes a long way in helping with prephrasing. So doing drills of just must be true questions could be a significant aid in helping you work on paraphrasing for that question type.

For a more specific technique, I'd encourage you to make sure to diagram out conditional reasoning when you see it on a must be true question. Further, once you've done that, see if there are any inferences you can make. For example, multiple conditional statements might be able to be combined into a chain, which could yield inferences not explicitly stated in the stimulus. It is common for conditional reasoning to be used on must be true questions, and it is also common for the right answer to be one of those inferences not explicitly stated. Taking the time to diagram can be a big help in giving you a sense of what the right answer might be before you even get to the answer choices.