Logical Reasoning

PT114 · S2 · Q26 Sociologist: Suggestions for improved

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

  • 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

Sociologist: Suggestions for improved efficiency that derive from employers are unlikely to elicit positive responses from employees, who tend to resent suggestions they did not generate.

Conclusion (therefore)

Employers should engage employees in nonthreatening dialogues that emphasize the positive contributions of the employee to the development of ideas that improve efficiency.

Intermediate Conclusion

This more employee-centered approach will help the employers implement their ideas more quickly and effectively.

Evidence

Top-down suggestions (from employer to employee) for improved efficiency are unlikely to elicit positive responses.

Evaluate

This argument is a little hard to organize. We don't necessarily have to call that last idea an Intermediate Conclusion, but it seems like an opinion we could potentially object to or ask about.

In terms of how the plan is supposed to work, the author assumes that whereas .

But in terms of getting from the last sentence to the Main Conclusion, the author assumes that

Goal

We either want to be more convinced that the plan will achieve the goal, or we want to connect the positive idea of "implemented more quickly and effectively" to the conclusion language of "should do it".

26.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the sociologist's reasoning?

  1. Employees are more likely to

    Weak Conclusion/Premise Match

    This principle seems somewhat relevant but helps us to establish that employees are more likely to accept suggestions. We're trying to justify that "ideas will be implemented more quickly and effectively" or that "employers should do this". The idea of employees' accepting suggestions seems in the same conversation, but not directly using the right language. Similarly, it feels like the plan being recommended would involve "suggestions less obviously directed at employees", but the language of the premise is "more likely to elicit positive response" or "emphasizes positive contributions of employee".

    1% picked this

  2. Correct

    Employees are more likely to

    Why this is right

    This connects the plan to the supposed result. The plan is supposed to emphasize employees' contributions (which we can assume would make one think, "Hey, I helped!"). The result is supposed to be that the employer's ideas will be implemented more quickly. The author was Assuming a Difference about this plan: - a plan in which employees don't feel like they generated suggestions will not get ideas implemented as quickly/effectively as would my alternative plan that does make the employees feel like they generated some of the ideas

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

    68% picked this

  3. Employees are more likely to

    Not as Good as (B)

    This answer seems fiendishly mean. It has the same structure as (B), but this answer hinges on an idea that isn't a clear difference between the two plans being considered, whereas (B) hinged on an idea that was a clear difference. There were two plans being compared: employer gives suggestions employer engages employees in a dialogue Since the first plan didn't involve "a dialogue", we can't use this answer choice to compare the suggested plan to the alternative plan. It does, however, somewhat strengthen the idea that there's a connection between participating in a dialogue and being more likely to implement ideas. But, for (B), it was established that there was a difference between the suggested plan and the alternative plan in terms of whether or not employees would have felt like they had participated in generating the suggestions. So (B) has a more powerful effect in filtering between the two plans.

    24% picked this

  4. Employees are more likely to

    Weak Conclusion Match

    This principle would allow one to conclude that "employees are more likely to generate good ideas", but the language we're looking to support is "employers should do it" or "employer's ideas will be implemented more quickly/effectively".

    4% picked this

  5. Employees are more likely to

    Out of Scope: resenting employers

    We only talked about employees resenting suggestions that they didn't come up with. This answer does reinforce that idea, but we don't need to be convinced that employees will resent their employers as well. We need to be convinced that engaging employees in a dialogue will lead to better implementation of the employers' ideas. If anything, this answer seems to undermine that concept by making it seem like if there IS a group dialogue, the employees will be insisting on their ideas being implemented, not the employers' ideas.

    2% picked this

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