Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT125 S4 Q21 Explanation

In an experiment, volunteers

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

TopicsParadox

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 an experiment, volunteers witnessed a simulated crime. After they witnessed the simulation the volunteers were first questioned by a lawyer whose goal was to get them to testify inaccurately about the event. They were then cross-examined by another lawyer whose goal was to cause them to correct the inaccuracies in their greater number of inaccurate details than most of the other witnesses during cross- examination.

What this question is testing

Paradox

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
21.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent conflict in the results concerning the witnesses who gave testimony containing fewer inaccurate details

Answer choices

  1. Deepens the Paradox2% picked this

    These witnesses were more observant about details than were most of

    If these witnesses were more observant than were most of the other witnesses, why did their testimony contain a greater number of inaccuracies?

  2. Deepens the Paradox1% picked this

    These witnesses had better memories than did most of the

    If these witnesses had better memories than did most of the other witnesses, why did their testimony contain a greater number of inaccuracies?

  3. Correct65% picked this

    These witnesses were less inclined than most of the other witnesses to be influenced in their testimony by

    Why this is right

    This makes those who gave testimony containing fewer inaccurate details less inclined to correct those inaccuracies and so could explain how those who strayed the furthest from the truth under the first lawyer’s questioning ended up further from the truth under the second lawyer’s questioning.

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

  4. Deepens the Paradox9% picked this

    These witnesses were unclear about the details at first but then began to remember more accurately

    How could witnesses who were unclear about the details at first provide testimony with fewer inaccurate details.

  5. Half Scope23% picked this

    These witnesses tended to give testimony containing more details than most of

    This might explain why these witnesses gave testimony containing a greater number of inaccurate details than most of the other witnesses during the second lawyer’s questioning, but does not explain why they gave fewer inaccurate details during the first lawyer’s questioning.

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