Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT114 S4 Q5 Explanation

Toxicologist: A survey of oil-refinery workers

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

TopicsStrengthen

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

Toxicologist: A survey of oil-refinery workers who work with MBTE, an ingredient currently used in some smog-reducing gasolines, found an alarming incidence of complaints about headaches, fatigue, and shortness of breath. Since gasoline containing MBTE will soon be widely of headaches, fatigue, and shortness of breath.

What this question is testing

Strengthen

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion more likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that are consistent with the argument but add no real support, or that strengthen a claim the argument doesn't make.

Winning move

Locate the gap between evidence and conclusion, then pick the choice that closes it.

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

The question
5.

Each of the following, if true, strengthens the toxicologist’s

Answer choices

  1. Strengthens7% picked this

    Most oil-refinery workers who do not work with MBTE do not have serious health problems involving headaches, fatigue,

    This suggests that oil-refinery workers not exposed to MBTE do not experience these symptoms, reinforcing the causal link between MBTE and the symptoms. This is the classic "No Cause, No Effect" plausibility strengthener.

  2. Correct79% picked this

    Headaches, fatigue, and shortness of breath are among the symptoms of several medical conditions that are potentially serious

    Why this is right

    This states that the symptoms are common to several medical conditions but doesn't address the causal link to MBTE or support the prediction about the general population, making it irrelevant to the argument.

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

  3. Strengthens1% picked this

    Since the time when gasoline containing MBTE was first introduced in a few metropolitan areas, those areas reported an increase in the number of

    This makes the author's causal assumption that MBTE causes these symptoms more plausible, by providing data points where "cause is present, effect is present". It's a temporal correlation, that we didn't see the symptoms until MBTE was introduced.

  4. Strengthens2% picked this

    Regions in which only gasoline containing MBTE is used have a much greater incidence of headaches, fatigue, and shortness of breath than do similar

    This provides more correlative data that where MBTE is present, the symptoms are present, and where it is absent, the symptoms are absent, supporting the causal assumption that MBTE leads to these symptoms.

  5. Strengthens11% picked this

    The oil-refinery workers surveyed were carefully selected to be representative of the broader population in their medical histories prior to exposure to MBTE, as

    This notes that the surveyed workers were representative of the broader population, supporting the extrapolation that the general population could experience similar symptoms when MBTE use becomes widespread.

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