Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT130 S3 Q20 Explanation

The layouts of supermarkets are not accidental

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

TopicsMost Supported

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

The layouts of supermarkets are not accidental: they are part of a plan designed to make customers walk all the way to the back of the store just to pick up a loaf of bread, passing tempting displays the whole way. But supermarkets can alienate customers list inconvenience as shoppers' top reason for disliking supermarkets.

What this question is testing

Most Supported

Conclusion

This is asking what general principle the supermarket story illustrates. The story is about a plan that backfires.

Evidence

Supermarkets are deliberately laid out to make you walk past tempting displays on your way to grab basics. That's a manipulation of customer behavior. But surveys say inconvenience is the #1 reason shoppers dislike supermarkets — so the layout that's supposed to drive impulse purchases is also driving customers crazy.

Evaluate

For a "principle illustrated" question, abstract away from the topic and ask: what general lesson does this scenario teach?

The shape of the story: someone manipulates other people for their own benefit, and the manipulation produces a side effect they don't want (alienation). That's a story about manipulation backfiring.

Watch for trap answers that capture only one piece of the picture (e.g., "alienation is bad for business" — true, but doesn't mention the manipulation; "even good plans fail" — not specific enough; "distracting customers is bad" — supermarkets aren't exactly distracting customers, they're routing them).

Goal

Pick the principle: manipulation of people can have unwelcome consequences.

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

The question
20.

Which one of the following propositions does the passage most

Answer choices

  1. Unsupported1% picked this

    Supermarkets should focus on customers who want to purchase many items in

    The passage doesn't say what supermarkets should focus on. It describes what they do (route shoppers to the back) and what consequence follows (customer alienation). The passage doesn't prescribe a strategy or recommend focusing on multi-item shoppers — that's a leap to a recommendation the passage never makes.

  2. Too Narrow19% picked this

    Alienation of customers is not good

    This captures only part of the story — the alienation side. It misses the central feature of the scenario, which is that the alienation is a consequence of deliberate manipulation. A general principle that mentions only alienation without manipulation doesn't capture what makes this scenario a teaching example.

  3. Too Broad10% picked this

    Even well-thought-out plans can

    "Even well-thought-out plans can fail" is technically consistent with the scenario but ignores the specific feature that makes this story noteworthy: the plan involves manipulating people. A generic "plans can fail" principle is so broad that almost any failed plan would illustrate it. The passage is illustrating something more specific.

  4. Bad Description3% picked this

    Distracting customers is not good for

    The supermarket layout doesn't exactly distract customers — it routes them past tempting displays. "Distracting" suggests pulling attention from a goal; the layout actually directs customers toward their goal (the bread at the back) but extends the path. The principle should describe manipulation, which is broader than distraction.

  5. Correct67% picked this

    Manipulation of people can have unwelcome

    Why this is right

    This captures the scenario's structure precisely. The supermarket layout is a deliberate manipulation of customers (forcing them past tempting displays), and the unwelcome consequence is alienation (inconvenience is shoppers' top reason for disliking supermarkets). Manipulation → unwelcome consequence is exactly the shape of the story.

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

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