#17 - Situation: A physical therapist wants her patients to derive

[Hanin Abu Amara]

Complete Question Explanation

Except, Parallel. The correct answer choice is (D).

We have a situation that explains the two goals of a physical therapist. 1. she wants her clients to enjoy the challenge of developing new skills and 2. she wants them to spend more time practicing those skills. The stimulus goes on to show that accomplishing the 1st goal will lead to the second goal.

If we abstract this stimulus we get a stimulus that discusses two goals and then infers that one would lead to the other. With the implied assumption that if they enjoy it then they would spend more time doing it.

We're looking for the answer choice that DOES NOT Parallel. Four of these answer choices will parallel and one will not.

Answer choice (A): does parallel because we have two goals by the same teacher. And we can derive the same analysis that achieving the first goal would reach the second. If kids understand the math then they're more likely to apply it. Therefore this is incorrect

Answer choice (B): here we again have two goals. If we achieve the goal of helping customers be more satisfied than they're less likely to call which means that achieving the first call helps the second one. This parallels and is therefore wrong.

Answer choice (C): If less books are lost or stolen then they are more likely to be returned on time. This shows that achieving the first goals will help with the second and thus parallels.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. This does not parallel and is therefore the correct answer. The first goal is to build a large warehouse and the second one is to have employees help. Achieving the goal of building a warehouse won't help us achieve the goal of getting the employees to help. Since achieving the first would mean that we already finished the second BEFORE achieving the first.

Answer choice (E): if there is a more varied repertoire then we are more likely to attract new patrons. This shows how goal 1 will help goals 2 and therefore this parallels

[Albertlyu]

Hi PS,

Please can anyone tell me why C is wrong here?

thank you!

Albert

[clbrogesr]

Albert,

I actually missed this on the PT (also chose C) but returning to it now I absolutely see why D is correct.

The situation and analysis construct a general principle in which success at a first thing leads to success at a second thing. In the stimulus situation, that is (1) people who spend more time practicing --> (2) derive more enjoyment. The stimulus complicates that relationship for the reader by inverting the order - the second part comes first and the first part comes second - but that is the relationship. So we're looking for an answer that parallels that general principle in which some first thing can (that language is crucial I believe) bring about success in a second thing.

In C, that principle is still at play, albeit weakly I would argue. If fewer books are lost or stolen, then more are being returned, and so more may be returned on time. I don't think it's the strongest relationship. Fewer books being lost or stolen simply means that more books are being returned. It does not mean that they are necessarily being returned on time. But there are a number of ways we could imagine success at increasing the rate of returned books also increases the rate of books returned on time.

This is probably a good time to return to the question itself. The question is not asking for situations where it is guaranteed to be true. It is instead asking for situations where it "could" be true. While the relationship in C is fairly weak, I do think it clears the "could be true" bar, particularly relative to the next answer choice ... D.

I will note that the lack of certainty in the C relationship is why I chose C during the PT. Unfortunately, as I too often do during my PTs, I let an attractive answer put me on autopilot for the rest of the question and end up missing a better choice - D. The LSAT writers continuously get me this way.

The relationship between the former and latter thing is weak in C, but it is non-existent in D. There is no clear mechanism through which success at building the new warehouse will help employees succeed at expanding the old warehouse. With answer choice C, we can imagine a number of different ways that success at increasing the rate of returned book increase the amount returned on time. With D, the answer gives us nothing.

[Adam Tyson]

I'll endorse the explanation above by clbrogesr with one exception, regarding this portion:

The stimulus complicates that relationship for the reader by inverting the order - the second part comes first and the first part comes second - but that is the relationship.

The author is not suggesting that practicing more comes before greater enjoyment, but the other way around. The Analysis indicates that getting students to enjoy their development will lead to them spending more time practicing; the chronology follows the structure of the situation. It's "get them to enjoy, and that will get them to practice more."

In answer C, the chronology is the same: if you can get fewer books to be lost or stolen, that could lead to more being returned on time. Certainly a lost or stolen book cannot be returned on time, so it makes sense that if you reduce the number of lost or stolen books you will get more returned on time. It's not a guarantee, but then again neither is the situation in the stimulus: more enjoyment COULD lead to more practice, and probably would, but it's not entirely certain even if the author of the analysis thinks it is. The same can be said of all the wrong answers: there is no guarantee that the analysis is correct, but it seems reasonable that accomplishing the first goal could contribute to accomplishing the second.

In the correct answer, D, there is no relationship between the two goals. Building a new warehouse has no obvious likely effect on getting employees to take part in planning what to do with the old warehouse. They are two completely unrelated tasks, neither of which impacts the other. That's means the analysis is not applicable, and so this is the exception we are looking for.

Nice work overall, clbrogesr, thanks for the assist!

[Albertlyu]

thank you both, for your help!

I thought the chronological order for the correct answer choice must be the same as it is in the stimulus.

[Katherinthesky]

Hello,

Can anyone please confirm that this is a Must Be True question?

Thanks in advance

[Robert Carroll]

Katherinthesky,

This is a Parallel Reasoning question.

Robert Carroll

[goingslow]

Hi there! I wonder how you would interpret (B) and the relationship between satisfaction and fewer calls about use? I chose (B) because I can be satisfied with a product but still confused about how to use the product and would want to consult the service representative.

On the other hand, in (D), having a new, larger warehouse gives us more space, so it would help plan the expansion of the old warehouse to meet any need for more space.

Would you pinpoint what's wrong with my line of reasoning?

Thank you!!!

[Adam Tyson]

Would increased satisfaction with a product reduce the number of calls for help? Probably, even if it would not necessarily eliminate those calls. The second goal is fewer calls, rather than no calls.

But how would building a larger warehouse help get employees to help with planning what to do with the old one? What connection is there? I can't imagine it myself. What about building the new warehouse will motivate the employees to get more involved, or give them more or better tools or opportunities to do so? It would take a lot of assumptions on our part to argue that the first thing might somehow help encourage the second.