LSAT Question #7

Logical Reasoning

There is a clear evidence that the mandated use of safety seats by children under age four has resulted in fewer child fatalities over the past five years. Compared to the five-year period prior to the passage of laws requiring the use of safety seats, fatalities of children under age four have decreased by 20 percent.

Which one of the following, if true, most substantially strengthens the argument above?

A. The number of serious automobile accidents involving........children under age four has remained steady over the.........past five years.
B. Automobile accidents involving children have decreased..........sharply over the past five years.
C. The use of air bags in automobiles has increased by...........30 percent over the past five years.
D. Most fatal automobile accidents involving children under...........age four occur in the driveway of their home.
E. The number of teenage drivers has increased by 30...........percent over the past five years.





the answer is....





A-The number of serious automobile accidents involving.......children under age four has remained steady over the.......past five years.

First, I eliminated C,D, and E. Unfortunately I picked B. I believe it is because of the statement "sharply over the past five years." and the first statement of the answer was already stated.

How did you do?

Credits to bestsamplequestions.com

LSAT Question #6

Logical Reasoning
Recent dental research shows that bacteria around the gum line produces a substance that in sufficient amounts induces preterm labor in pregnant women and clogging of arteries, both of which add to payout by health insurers to medical-service providers. In response, one health insurance company has begun to provide additional dental benefits, including coverage for one additional cleaning by a professional hygienist or dentist each year, to pregnant women and to people proven to be at high risk of developing heart disease.

The insurance company's response described above would be most likely to minimize the company's payouts to medical-service providers if which of the following were also true?

A. Accumulation of the substance that induces preterm labor ca be prevented by daily use of certain inexpensive mouthwashes.
B. It often takes at least a year for the substance that induce clogging of the arteries to accumulate to a dangerous level.
C. The daily dental-hygiene habits of pregnant women and heart-disease patients, as a group, are similar to those of the general population.
D. The risk of developing heart disease is greater for individuals with a family history of heart disease than for those with no such history.
E. The medical costs associated with preterm labor are generally less than those associated with heart disease.




And the answer is...




"The correct response is (D). Providing additional benefits to a particular “high risk” group in order to reduce payout risk later works only if the insurance company can identify who is in the group to begin with. That’s why (D), which tells us that it’s easy to identify individuals at high risk of heart disease, lends support to the company’s response (assuming, of course, that the company wants to minimize payouts, which is given in the argument). "


I honestly did bad on this question. I chose E. After reading the answer, I realized that I misread the question.


Remember, practice makes perfect(or close to perfection)!


How did you do?


Credits: West.net

LSAT Question #5

Analytical Reasoning
Buses 1, 2, and 3 make one trip each day, and they are the only ones that riders A, B, C, D, E, F, and G take to work.

Neither E nor G takes bus 1 on a day when B does.
G does not take bus 2 on a day when D does.
When A and F take the same bus, it is always bus 3.
C always takes bus 3.

Traveling together to work, B, C, and G could take which of the same buses on a given day?

A. 1 only
B. 2 only
C. 3 only
D. 2 and 3 only
E. 1, 2, and 3





and the answer is...




C. I got the answer because of the last sentence: "C always takes bus 3."

For further clarification, here's what Petersons.com said:
Bus 1: If B, then no E or G
Bus 2: If D, then no G
Bus 3: C always
Bus 3: When A and F take the same bus.

How did you do on this one? Again, I feel like the questions sometimes give too much information to throw us off, but with practice I'm sure we will be able to discern the right information to answer the questions!

Credits: Petersons.com

LSAT Question #6

Analytical Reasoning

Buses 1, 2, and 3 make one trip each day, and they are the only ones that riders A, B, C, D, E, F, and G take to work.

Neither E nor G takes bus 1 on a day when B does. G does not take bus 2 on a day when D does. When A and F take the same bus, it is always bus 3. C always takes bus 3.

Traveling together to work, B, C, and G could take which of the same buses on a given day?

A. 1 only
B. 2 only
C. 3 only
D. 2 and 3 only





The answer is...





C.
"Bus 1: If B, ten no E or G
Bus 2: If D, then no G
Bus 3: C always
Bus 3: When A and F take the same bus."

Credits: petersons.com

LSAT Question #5

Logical Reasoning
When pregnant lab rats are given caffeine equivalent to the amount a human would consume by drinking six cups of coffee per day, an increase in the incidence of birth defects results. When asked if the government would require warning labels on products containing caffeine, a spokesperson stated that it would not because if the finding of these studies were to be refuted in the future, the government would lose credibility.

Which of the following is most strongly suggested by the government's statement above?

A. A warning that applies to a small population is inappropriate.
B. Very few people drink as many as six cups of coffee a day.
C. There are doubts about the conclusive nature of studies on animals.
D. Studies on rats provide little data about human birth defects.
E. The seriousness of birth defects involving caffeine is not clear.





The answer is...





C. "If the government acts before the study can be proven conclusively, it will lose credibility."

I got this one wrong because I completely ignored the last statement from the information given. Anybody with me on this one...?

Credits: petersons.com

LSAT Question #4

Logical Reasoning

In our city, the cost of housing is the single largest component of the cost of living for residents. Currently, housing costs in the city's North End are higher than in the city's West End but lower than in the city's East End. The cost of living in the West End is greater than int he East End.

If all of the above statements are true, which of the following must also be true?

A. Housing costs in the East End are greater than in the West End.
B. The cost of living in the North End is greater than in the West End.
C. The average cost of renting a house is greater in the East End than int he West End.
D. Housing costs in the East End are greater than in the North End.
E. Housing costs are greater int he North End than in the West End.





The answer is...





A. According to west.net, "All you need to answer this question is the second sentence of the passage. Given that the North End's housing costs are higher than in the West End but lower than in the East End, it must be true that housing costs in the East End are greater than in the West End."

I was caught between A and D. But then I was thinking too hard again and completely ignored the statement that clearly answers the question. Was it the same for you too?

Credits: west.net

LSAT Question #3

Among the inventory at a certain vintage furniture store are seven lamps. Each lamp has either a ceramic or wood base, and each lamp comes with either a brown, red, or green shade.


More lamps have a ceramic base than a wood base.
Every red lamp shade is paired with a ceramic base.
No lamp with a wood base has a brown shade.


If the two and only two ceramic lamps are paired with lampshades that are the same in color, then which of the following must be true?

A. One of the seven lamps has a brown shade.
B. Two of the seven lamps have red shades.
C. Three of the seven lamps have a wood base.
D. Four of the seven lamps have green shades.
E. Five of the seven lamps have a ceramic base





And the answer is...






C. Three of the seven lamps have a wood base.

Answer and Analysis

The correct response is (C). We know that at least four of the seven lamps have ceramic bases. Assuming that two and only two such lamps have shades that are the same color, the total number of ceramic lamps is limited to four (only three shade colors are available). Therefore, exactly three of the seven lamps are wood. 

I needed to use a scratch paper to be sure on this one. It took me a while to figure it out. There are many questions like this in the LSAT so practicing jotting down notes would be ideal. I was seriously tempted to just go to the answer because I didn't want to think too hard. How was it for you?

Credit to west.net/~stewart

LSAT Question #2

Logical Reasoning

Struthers College has built its reputation for academic excellence largely on significant contributions from wealthy alumni who are avid fans of the school's football team. Although the team has won ore national championships over the years than any other team in its division, this year it did not even win the division title, and so Struthers College can expect to see a decline in alumni contributions next year.

The above argument relies on which of the following assumptions about Struthers College?

A. The college's reputation for academic excellence depends on the performance of its football team.

B. Contribution from alumni are needed for the college to produce a winning football team.

C. Some Struthers alumni contribute to the college because they enjoy seeing its football team win.

D. The college's football team will continue its losing streak next year.

E. As a a group, the college's alumni will have at leas as much discretionary money to give away next year as this year.

And the correct answer is....

C. Some Struthers alumni contribute to the college because they enjoy seeing its football team win.

I honestly got this answer without thinking too much. However, here's the explanation given by west.net/~stewart

"This argument depends on a cause-and-effect link between the football team’s performance and the level of alumni contributions, doesn’t it? In other words, it assumes that the alumni who contribute to the college are motivated to do so (at least to some extent) by their interest in the football team and its success. "

I actually got this question right. I think the key to these questions is to not over think. This might sound obvious but use the information given to answer the questions. Sometimes I think we make too many assumptions BASED on the information given. How did you do on this one?

Credit to west.net/~stewart

First Example LSAT Question

Among the inventory at a certain vintage furniture store are seven lamps. Each lamp has either a ceramic or wood base, and each lamp comes with either a brown, red, or green shade.

• More lamps have a ceramic base than a wood base.
• Every red lamp shade is paired with a ceramic base.
• No lamp with a wood base has a brown shade.

1. Which statement about the seven lamps CANNOT be true?

A. Five lamps have red shades

B. Five lamps have a ceramic base.

C. Five lamps have brown shades.

D. Four lamps have a wood base.

E. four lamps have green shades

First, read the question carefully! You are trying to figure out which option CANNOT be true. 

The correct answer is D. Four lamps have a wood base

Why? It is stated that "More lamps have a ceramic base than a wood base." 

There are seven lamps, so having four wood base lamps would mean there would only be three ceramic base lamps.

This is one of the easy questions that I could find. I was so overwhelmed with the questions, but practice always makes perfect! Tell me how you did on the first question!

Credit: west.net/~stewart