Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT102 S3 Q3 Explanation

In a recession, a decrease in consumer

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsMost Supported

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

In a recession, a decrease in consumer spending causes many businesses to lay off workers or even to close. Workers who lose their jobs in a recession usually cannot find new jobs. The result is an increase in the number of people who are jobless. Recovery from a recession is defined by economy after a recession and therefore delay hiring additional workers as long as possible.

What this question is testing

Most Supported

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
3.

The statements above, if true, provide most support for which one of

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong: usually5% picked this

    Recessions are usually caused by a decrease in businesspeople’s confidence in

    We never talk about anything that causes a recession, only the effects of a recession, and the causes of what brings us out of a recession. So we have no way to speculate what causes 51% or more (usually) of recessions.

  2. Too Strong: required2% picked this

    Governmental intervention is required in order for an economy to recover

    The author doesn't say anything that would allow us to say that an economy can't recover from a recession without governmental intervention.

  3. Too Strong: majority7% picked this

    Employees of businesses that close during a recession make up the majority of the workers who lose their

    We have no way to quantify whether 51% or more of unemployed workers during a recession came from companies that had to close. It's possible that the majority of unemployed workers came from companies that didn't close but laid off some of their workforce.

  4. Correct85% picked this

    Sometimes recovery from a recession does not promptly result in a decrease in the number of

    Why this is right

    We definitely are very attracted to how weak the language is (sometimes / does not promptly). This answer is doing the ol' Reconcile the Pivot, giving us a safe takeaway that combines the idea after the But with the stuff before it. Because businesspeople delay hiring additional workers as long as possible after a recession, we can say that sometimes we don't promptly get a decrease in the number of people who are jobless.

    Skill tested: Most Supported · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Too Strong: equally good0% picked this

    Workers who lose their jobs during a recession are likely to get equally good jobs

    We don't have any way to support such an extreme comparison that the jobs workers get after a recession are usually equally good.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free