Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT108 S3 Q16 Explanation

To act responsibly in one's

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

TopicsPrinciple-Conform

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

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

To act responsibly in one's professional capacity, one must act on the basis of information that one has made a reasonable is accurate and complete.

What this question is testing

Principle-Conform

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
16.

Which one of the following judgments most closely conforms to the principle

Answer choices

  1. Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

    Peggy acted responsibly in ordering new computers for the school last year because they turned out to be needed due to an

    This is concluding the person did act responsibly, so we needn't read any further. Our Principle can only derive the conclusion "did not act responsibly", because you can only conclude what's on the right side of the arrow. If you weren't acting then you weren't on info you tried to ? acting responsibly make sure was true in your professional and accurate capacity

  2. Bad Conclusion Match30% picked this

    Mary acted responsibly in firing John, for she first examined the details of his work record and listened to negative reports from

    This is concluding the person did act responsibly, so we needn't read any further. Our Principle can only derive the conclusion "did not act responsibly", because you can only conclude what's on the right side of the arrow. If you weren't acting then you weren't on info you tried to ? acting responsibly make sure was true in your professional and accurate capacity

  3. Correct59% picked this

    Toril did not act responsibly in investing the company's money in Twicycled Ink, for, though the investment yielded a large return, she had not

    Why this is right

    Correct This is concluding the person did not act responsibly, so it's worth reading. Does the evidence establish that Toril didn't act on well-verified information? If you weren't acting then you weren't on info you tried to ? acting responsibly make sure was true in your professional and accurate capacity Yes! It says that "she had not investigated the risks of the investment". And was this irresponsible behavior done in Toril's professional capacity? Yes, she was investing the company's money.

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

  4. Bad Trigger Match0% picked this

    Conchita did not act responsibly in hiring Helmer to do the company's bookkeeping because Helmer made a mistake that cost the company a lot

    This is concluding the person did not act responsibly, so it's worth reading. Does the evidence establish that Conchita didn't act on well-verified information? If you weren't acting then you weren't on info you tried to ? acting responsibly make sure was true in your professional and accurate capacity Not really. It doesn't say one way or the other whether Conchita made a reasonable effort to make sure she was acting on true / complete info, but in order for an answer to be correct it needs to tell us explicitly that she wasn't acting on info she verified was good. The fact that Helmer made a mistake he had never made before is consistent with the idea that she did do her due diligence and Helmer had nothing like this in his past.

  5. Bad Trigger Match9% picked this

    Jennifer did not act responsibly in deciding where to go on her vacation because, instead of carefully weighing her options, she waited until the

    This is concluding the person did not act responsibly, so it's worth reading. Does the evidence establish that Jennifer didn't act on well-verified information? If you weren't acting then you weren't on info you tried to ? acting responsibly make sure was true in your professional and accurate capacity Yes, it does. She acted on impulse, not well-verified info. And was she acting irresponsibly in her professional capacity? No, she was just booking vacation, which sounds like a personal decision, so this principle doesn't apply.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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