Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT129 S3 Q9 Explanation

Physician: In comparing our country

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

Physician: In comparing our country with two other countries of roughly the same population size, I found that even though we face the same dietary, bacterial, and stress-related causes of ulcers as they do, prescriptions for ulcer medicines in all socioeconomic strata are much rarer here than suffer significantly fewer ulcers, per capita, than they do.

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
9.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the

Answer choices

  1. Irrelevant Comparison5% picked this

    The two countries that were compared with the physician's country had approximately the same ulcer

    This doesn’t provide an explanation of the discrepancy and instead provides more detail about the discrepancy itself.

  2. Weakens5% picked this

    The people of the physician's country have a cultural tradition of stoicism that encourages them to ignore physical ailments rather than

    This provides an alternative explanation for the discrepancy and so undermines the physician’s argument.

  3. Out of Scope - Other Group2% picked this

    Several other countries not covered in the physician's comparisons have more prescriptions for ulcer medication than

    Other countries are not relevant to explaining the discrepancy observed in the physician’s argument.

  4. Correct79% picked this

    A person in the physician's country who is suffering from ulcers is just as likely to obtain a prescription for the ailment as is

    Why this is right

    This makes a very strong connection between "whether or not you have a prescription" and "whether or not you have an ulcer". The argument's reasoning was "If prescriptions here are rarer, then ulcers here are rarer" This answer makes us feel good about using "number of prescriptions" as a metric for "number of patients with ulcers". In all the countries being studied, the relationship between having a prescription and having an ulcer is identical.

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

  5. Weaker Impact10% picked this

    The physician's country has a much better system for reporting the number of prescriptions of a given type that are obtained each year than

    This does sort of undermine the alternate explanation that prescriptions are rarer in this country due to under-reporting, so it strengthens somewhat. But this doesn't have as much strengthening impact as (D), which firmly connects "number of prescriptions" to "number of ulcer patients".

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