LSAT Question Types and Strategies

Reading Comprehension Strategy

- Prioritize the first paragraph of the passage

- Skim the other paragraphs, highlighting the key argument

- Make notes of patterns and structures

- Pay attention to author's tone

Reading for Information

- Question stem will say "statements above" or "passage above"

- Summarize the facts of the argument

- Diagram the conditionals if applicable.

Reading for Reasoning

- Question stem asks you about the "reasoning" or "argument"

- Identify the conclusion and premise immediately

Conditional Statements

- If/then statements

- Left side of your arrow is the SUFFICIENT CONDITION -->

- Right side of your arrow is the NECESSARY CONDITION

- The contrapositive = the conditional, but flips and negates the statement

Necessary Assumption

An unstated premise that needs to be true for the conclusion to be valid. The conclusion cannot exist without it. "Assumption required" is asked.

Use the negation test to decide if an answer choice is the NA. If it destroys your conclusion once negated, it's the correct answer.

Sufficient Assumption

The missing link between the conclusion and premise. Bridges the two together accordingly.

Necessary Assumption -- Strategy (Help)

1. Find the missing link or gap between the p and c

2. Use the negation test if needed

3. Anticipate "what must be TRUE for this argument to exist"

4. Credited response makes the relationship between the premise and conclusion OR rules out obstacles, and uses weaker language.

Sufficient Assumption -- Strategy (Help)

1. "Which...allows the conclusion to follow logically" or "allows the conclusion to be properly drawn"

2. Consider what is NEEDED to solidify the conclusion.

3. DO NOT USE NEGATION TEST

4. Credited response must provide the missing link between p and c that will solidify the conclusion, prove the conclusion, and use strong language.

Casual Arguments

Claims that ask what is causing what.

Hurting Casual Arguments

1. Shows alternative causes

2. New evidence that disproves/attacks the causal relationship

3. Show in the answer choice that it's CORRELATION or REVERSE CAUSALITY, not causal

4. New info is acceptable

Helping Causal Arguments

1. Rule out alternative causes

2. Evidence that establishes the causal relationship

3. Correlation is ruled out, only looking for CAUSAL

4. No reverse causality

5. New info is acceptable

Causal Arguments Strategy

1. What is the main subject of the conclusion?

2. What are the premises/reasons for the conclusion?

3. What is the assumption between the reasons given and the claim made?

4. Process of elimination

Inference Questions (Extract)

Question stem will say "must be true/false" or "must be strongly supported" by "statements/info above".

Reading for information, so no new information is acceptable.

Inference Questions Strategy

1. Categorize the facts line-by-line

2. Note conditional or quantity statements

3. Read closely for specific language

4. Process of elimination

Comparison Arguments

The conclusion is based on a comparison or analogy within the premises.

Comparisons can be two different things, different time periods, or parts to whole.

Comparison Flaws/Assumption

The items are comparable, and what is true for one can be applied to the other.

Comparison Arguments Strategy

1. To hurt - point out the differences between the two things being compared.

2. To help - confirm the similarity or rule out differences.

Survey and Sample Flaws

When a survey, study or sample is provided in the argument.

Mainly used to interpret evidence or disagree with a position.

Surveys and Samples Flaw/Assumption

The sample in the premises must be representative of the larger population in the conclusion.

The data is valid -- all relevant evidence or population was included

Survey and Sample Arguments Strategy

1. To hurt - show how the population is NOT representative or suggest evidence that should have been included in the data.

2. To help - show evidence that the sample IS representative or that the data is valid.

3. Immediately select the unrepresentative option for any WEAKEN question.

Absence of Evidence Flaws

The conclusion is that because evidence has not been found, or because the premises are incorrect, then something does not exist or happen.

Mainly used to interpret evidence or disagree with a position.

Absence of Evidence Flaw/Assumption

Confusing the absence of evidence with EVIDENCE of absence.

Absence of Evidence Strategy

1. To hurt -- give an example that highlights how the conclusion is extreme/unwarranted

2. To help -- provide additional evidence to support the conclusion or rule out obstacles to it.

Percentages and Numbers Flaws

There are a subset of survey and sample flaws. They use percentages or proportions to support the conclusion by misinterpreting statistics.

Percentages and Numbers Flaw/Assumptions

Two sets of statistics are based on comparable totals.

I.e., that 20% of one group must be larger than 10% of another group.

Percentages and Numbers Strategy

1. To hurt -- show that the groups are different and that their numbers cannot be compared.

2. To help -- provide evidence that the statistics are valid or that the totals are the same. Look for what would allow it to become a better argument.

Attack Flaws

Attacking the character/motivations about someone personally. Attacks the opposition personally rather than the structure/content of their argument.

I.e., we cannot believe them about reducing budgets because they went to jail 10 years ago.

If it gives no evidence, it has nothing to do with the question.

Attack Questions Flaw/Assumption

The flaw is that the argument does not address the substance of the argument.

Attack Questions Strategy

1. To hurt -- point out how the author fails to address the substance of the argument, by focusing on the character of the person.

2. To help -- provide evidence that shows attack is relevant to the substance of the argument.

Shifting Meaning Flaws

The conclusion is based on two different interpretations of the same word.

Shifting Meaning Flaw/Assumption

Equivocal use of a term or ambiguity in relation to a key term.

Equivocal and ambiguous DO NOT MEAN VAGUE! They mean open to TWO interpretations.

Appeal Flaws

They appeal to authority -- this person holds a position of authority and says this, and therefore it must be right. It's ONLY valid if you have evidence to support that authority.

Offers what an authority thinks or does as a premise.

Appeal Flaw/Assumption

Assumes what the authority says or does must be valid.

Circular Flaws

When the premise and conclusion are indistinguishable. The C and P are simply paraphrases of each other.

Circular Flaw/Assumption

Assumes what it sets out to prove, assumes the conclusion is true, or the conclusion merely restates evidence given to support it.

Descriptions of these show up frequently in flaw questions, wrong answers.

Keywords in Quantity Statements

1. All = every instance

2. None = absolutely no instance

3. Most = more than 50%

4. Some = at least 1

5. Many = at least 1

Inference Questions -- Wrong Answers

1. Have new facts/info not in the argument

2. Language/scope is too extreme or doesn't match the argument

3. If a conditional, it must match the same pattern given

Casual Arguments -- Wrong Answers

1. Anything too vague, general, irrelevant, or opposite of the conclusion must be eliminated.

2. Does not address BOTH the premise and conclusion.

Point at Issue Questions (Extract)

- "The speakers are committed to disagreeing about..." or "which of the following a point at issue between the speakers"

- Reading for information, but spot conclusions if it's obvious.

- Answers: the speakers MUST disagree. If you don't know what one of the speakers thinks about the answer choice, it's WRONG.

Reading Comp - Comparative Passages Strategy

Find the logical relationship between the passages:

- Are they on the same side of the issue?

- Are they agreeing/disagreeing?

- Is one more general and the other more specific?

- Is one more opinionated than the other?

What to Look for in Reading Comp Passages

Paragraph 1 = subject/topic being discussed, and the author's opinion

Paragraph 2 = What are they doing with the subject? Are they supporting/critiquing in a positive way? More explanation on the topic?

Last para = clear statement from author that is the conclusion. The conclusion must connect to the position outlined in para 1.

Extract Questions

Reading for info -- inference and point at issue questions. Extracting information from the question and reflecting it in your answer choice.

Match Questions

Reading for reasoning -- main point and parallel reasoning questions. Matching key features of the argument to answer choices.

Main Point Questions -- Strategy (Match)

- "Which of the following accurately expresses the main point/conclusion of the argument?"

- Answer will summarize the conclusion if you are matching, and the answer is the conclusion if you are providing it.

- Process of elimination

Main Point -- Wrong Answers

1. Irrelevant

2. New information is in the answer

3. If providing the conclusion, the answer is not supported by the argument.

Reasoning Questions -- Strategy (Match)

- "The argument uses which of the following techniques" or "the assertion/claim ____ plays which role in the argument"?

- Break down the premises if possible; which premise directly supports the conclusion (substansive premise), and which premise just gives background (background premise)?

- Process of elimination

Reasoning Questions -- Wrong Answers

1. Doesn't match the argument

2. New information in the answer

3. Partially matches the argument (the claim is a premise, but doesn't support what the answer claims it supports)

Parallel Questions -- Strategy (Match)

- "Which of the following parallels the reasoning/flawed reasoning of the argument above?" or "which of the following is most similar in its reasoning to the argument above?"

- Identify the conclusion and premises, and the METHOD of argumentation being used.

- Note if the argument is positive or negative

Parallel Questions -- Wrong Answers

1. Does not match

2. Different argument

3. Wrong method of argumentation or language tense

Principle-Match -- Strategy (Match)

- "Which of the following statements match the principle stated above?" or "which of the following principles most closely conforms to the argument"

- Either you're given the principle and match it to an answer, or provide the principle.

- Principle = BIG IDEA of the argument, or moral of the story

Principle-Match -- Process of Elimination

1. Won't match the argument (principle must describe the argument)

2. Irrelevant

3. New language is OK

Twisted Arguments (Resolve/Explain)

Reading for information and finding the fact that lead to a conflict.

What are the two facts in conflict with each other? The answer solves by giving us new info that resolves.

Evaluate Arguments

The answer choice needs to give us the crucial way to assess the argument.

What is the best piece of information to evaluate whether this is a good or bad argument? We aren't trying to make them better/worse, but what will make the argument itself good.

Reading Comp -- Process of Elimination Basics

1. Pay attention to every word of each answer choice: one wrong word invalidates the entire choice.

2. Be aware of extreme language.

3. Keep track of the question scope (whether it asks about the passage as a whole or just one part).

4. When down to TWO, compare the choices and look for differences. Highlight the differences and then refer to the passage.

Help (Strengthen) Arguments

Tasks:

- Strengthen

- Necessary assumption

- Sufficient assumption

- Principle strengthen

Common features:

- Read for reason

- P and C = relationship of importance

Hurt (Weaken) Arguments

Tasks:

- Flaw

- Weaken

Common features:

- Read for reason

- This will give us patterns of analysis

- Holes in the inexistent bridge between P and C

Resolve/Explain Questions Strategy

- "Which of the following, if true, resolves/explains/reconciles the information or paradox above?"

- Read for information

- Identify the conflict, discrepancy or weirdness in the argument.

- How can these two things (p and c) be true?

Resolve/Explain -- Process of Elimination

- The right answer will discuss/address both sides of the conflict or paradox in the argument

- Wrong answers will provide irrelevant information or be too extreme in language.

Negation Test

Only used in necessary assumption questions. If the answer choice was not true (negated), the argument does NOT make sense. It should be destroyed upon negation.

Flaw Questions (Hurt) -- Strategy

1. "Describes a flaw/error in the reasoning" or "most vulnerable to criticism"

2. Note the method of argumentation (causal, conditional, comparison, etc.)

3. Describe the flaw in your own words

Flaw Questions -- Process of Elimination

The correct answer will:

- Accurately describe the flaw in the argument

- Will not contain information not in the argument

- Argument must be accurately described

Strengthen Questions (Help) -- Strategy

1. "Most strengthens/justifies the argument" or "provides the most support for the conclusion"

2. Think about the evidence given, and how we can STRENGTHEN the relationship between the p and c.

3. Provide new evidence to strengthen the conclusion, and rule out barriers to it.

Strengthen Questions -- Process of Elimination

Wrong answers will be:

1. Irrelevant to the conclusion of the argument

2. WEAKEN, not strengthen

3. Restate or summarize an existing premise.

Weaken Questions (Hurt) -- Strategy

1. "Which of the following, if true, weakens the argument?"

2. Identify the conclusion

3. Evidence for the conclusion MUST be considered; evidence that goes against the conclusion, provides barriers between the p and c, and questions the validity of the data in the argument.

Weaken Questions -- Process of Elimination

Wrong answers will:

1. Be irrelevant to the conclusion

2. STRENGTHEN the argument, not weaken

3. Restate or summarize a premise

Principle-Strengthen Questions (Help) -- Strategy

1. "Which of the following principles, if valid, most justifies the reasoning?"

2. Use the following test on your answer choice: "My conclusion is justified because [answer choice]"...

3. Think about the theme or law of the argument

Principle-Strengthen -- Process of Elimination

Wrong answers will:

1. Be irrelevant or doesn't help the argument

2. Be out of context

3. Provide new info that doesn't impact the conclusion