Logical Reasoning

PT131 · S2 · Q22 A recent study confirms

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

  • 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

A recent study confirms that nutritious breakfasts make workers more productive.

Conclusion

A recent study confirms that nutritious breakfasts make workers more productive.

Evidence

For one month, workers at Plant A received free nutritious breakfasts every day before work, while workers in Plant B did not.

The productivity of Plant A’s workers increased, while that of Plant B’s workers did not.

Evaluate

Like the vast majority of arguments involving Studies / Experiments, the data from the study/experiment involves some curious asymmetry or difference.

Curious Fact: why did the productivity of Plant A's workers increase, while B's didn't?

Author's Explanation: because A's workers were eating nutritious breakfasts, which made them more productive.

Goal

We can strengthen by ruling out an Alternate Explanation for the curious fact (f.e. ),

or we can strengthen by helping the plausibility of the Author's Explanation (f.e. )

22.

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

  1. Correct

    Few workers in Plant B

    Why this is right

    This strengthens by affirming an assumption. We know that Plant B's workers were not served nutritious breakfasts by their employer, but they still might have eaten a good breakfast before coming to work. In order for the author's storyline to be plausible (the nutritious breakfasts that A's workers ate were the causal difference maker!), there has to be a difference to begin with. If B's workers ate a hearty breakfast before work, then we couldn't explain the productivity difference in terms of breakfasts, because both plants' workers had breakfasts. So this answer is supplying a Necessary Assumption, something that would need to be true for the author's explanation to even be plausible.

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

    52% picked this

  2. Workers in the study from

    Too Weak

    Without knowing whether the time of day that workers start impacts their productivity this does not support the argument.

    7% picked this

  3. During the month before the

    Irrelevant Comparison

    It doesn't matter how Plant A and B compare to each other. We're only measuring how they compare to themselves. Over the course of the study, Plant A's productivity increased, compared to what Plant A's productivity used to be. Meanwhile, Plant B did not increase its productivity from its previous reference point. If we were asking, "Why is Student 1's score going up, while Student 2's score is frozen?", it would be irrelevant whether the two of them are scoring the same as each other or differently. We're just trying to solve the mystery of why one of them is improving and the other one isn't.

    38% picked this

  4. Workers from Plant A took

    Irrelevant Comparison

    The issue is an improvement in productivity within Plant A. The argument does not rely on comparing the productivity of workers at the two plants with each other.

    2% picked this

  5. Workers in Plant B were

    Irrelevant Comparison

    The issue is an improvement in productivity within Plant A. The argument does not rely on comparing the productivity of workers at the two plants with each other.

    1% picked this

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