LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

General questions relating to the LSAT or LSAT preparation.
 melissa27
  • Posts: 38
  • Joined: Jan 17, 2012
|
#4272
Can you please explain question #20 and exactly what type of flawed reasoning the stimulus demonstrates and how that is similar to the correct answer choice.

Thank you!!
 Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1153
  • Joined: Apr 11, 2011
|
#4273
That is one of the hardest questions in that section. The argument claims that because most nine-year-olds correctly identify the logos of major cigarette brands but very few nine-year-olds smoke, there is little connection between logo recognition and smoking. Abstractly, the argument attempts to show that a possible cause (logo recognition) does not have an expected effect (smoking).

The question stem asks you to identify the answer choice with the most similar flawed reasoning. Keeping in mind the different tests for Parallel Reasoning questions, consider the following when selecting an answer:

Match the Method of Reasoning: The argument asserts that a cause and effect relationship does not exist, so the correct answer choice must feature a similar type of relationship.

Match the Conclusion: The conclusion is fairly strong—“there is little or no connection between two items.” The correct answer must feature a similar idea.

Match the Premises: There are two premises, one of which addresses a poll (a survey or a study would be similar ideas) and the other about results from that poll which indicate that a possible cause is not having an effect.

Match the Validity of the Reasoning: In this case the question stem tells you that the correct answer must contain flawed reasoning.

Obviously, the poll proves little, because it refers to juveniles who cannot purchase their own cigarettes, and ignores the potential effect that may occur by the time the child is old enough to plausibly pursue obtaining cigarettes. Since you are asked to identify the choice that contains similar reasoning, you should look for a response that refers to a group that has not yet had ample opportunity to develop a response to a particular cause.

A is the correct answer choice. Similar to the stimulus, a causal relationship is denied on the basis of a study. The conclusion, although worded differently, has the same meaning as that in the stimulus.

Specifically, three months is definitely not enough time to infer anything about the long-term effect of mercury poisoning, so this answer choice similarly does not cover enough time to rule out a cause-effect relationship.


Please let me know whether this clears up that question--thanks!

~Steve
 melissa27
  • Posts: 38
  • Joined: Jan 17, 2012
|
#4284
It does!

Thank you, Steve!!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.