Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT128 S2 Q11 Explanation

A recently completed study

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

A recently completed study of several hundred subjects, all of approximately the same age, showed that those who exercised regularly during the study were much less likely to die during the actually increase one's life span.

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
11.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens

Answer choices

  1. Weakens8% picked this

    The subjects who did not exercise regularly during the study tended to have diets that

    This provides an alternate explanation for why the non-exercisers died more often. It wasn't because they weren't exercising; it was because they were eating crappy food.

  2. No Impact1% picked this

    The subjects who did not exercise regularly during the study tended to blame their lack of exercise on

    We don't care why they didn't exercise, unless that reason (f.e. they have cancer and have lost the energy to jog around town) is itself causally linked to death. Being too busy / lacking time isn't a common sense cause of death, so this detail is irrelevant.

  3. Weakens, if anything2% picked this

    A large number of the deaths recorded were attributable to preexisting

    This has no impact because the answer isn't telling us whether these deaths were with people who were or weren't exercising. But if it were telling us "the people who died had a bunch of preexisting conditions / illnesses", then it would weaken by providing an alternate explanation for why they died (illness, not lack of exercise).

  4. Correct79% picked this

    Whether or not a given subject was to exercise during the study was determined by the researchers

    Why this is right

    This helps to rule out our alternate explanation that whether or not you were exercising was really caused by your underlying health in the first place. Our alternate explanation was, "Maybe it's just that the people who were already sick/enfeebled were not able to exercise, whereas the vital/healthy people were. Obviously the sick/enfeebled people died before the vital/healthy people." By telling us that whether or not a subject exercised was random, it rules out the idea that the Exercise-Group was already healthier and more likely to live longer to begin with.

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

  5. No Impact11% picked this

    A person who exercises regularly is probably doing so out of concern for his or

    Why someone would tend to exercise regularly is irrelevant to this argument. We're just trying to figure out whether in this study the regular exercise was the causal difference-maker for living longer.

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