Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT131 S2 Q1 Explanation

On the Caribbean island

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

On the Caribbean island of Guadeloupe, a researcher examined 35 patients with atypical Parkinson's disease and compared their eating habits to those of 65 healthy adults. She found that all of the patients with atypical Parkinson's regularly ate the tropical fruits soursop, custard apple, and pomme cannelle, whereas only 10 this, she concluded that eating these fruits causes atypical Parkinson's.

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
1.

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

Answer choices

  1. Correct94% picked this

    For many of the atypical Parkinson's patients, their symptoms stopped getting worse, and in some cases actually abated, when they stopped eating

    Why this is right

    One shows that when the presumed cause is absent, the presumed effect is absent as well. This strengthens the correlation, which does make the causal relationship more likely to be true.

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

  2. Too Weak2% picked this

    Of the healthy adults who did not regularly eat soursop, custard apple, and pomme cannelle, most had eaten each of these fruits

    This is too weak to undermine the correlation between those who regularly eat these tropical fruits and atypical Parkinson’s.

  3. Weaken1% picked this

    In areas other than Guadeloupe, many people who have never eaten soursop, custard apple, and pomme cannelle

    This makes it less likely that these fruits are the culprit since this weakens the correlation between atypical Parkinson’s and these fruits.

  4. Weaken1% picked this

    The 10 healthy adults who regularly ate soursop, custard apple, and pomme cannelle ate significantly greater quantities of these fruits, on average, than

    This makes it less likely that these fruits are the culprit since this weakens the correlation between atypical Parkinson’s and these fruits.

  5. Weaken2% picked this

    Soursop, custard apple, and pomme cannelle contain essential vitamins not contained in any other food that is commonly

    This makes these fruits less likely to be the culprit since they contain essential vitamins, something common sense would suggest is healthy.

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