Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT132 S2 Q9 Explanation

A retrospective study

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

TopicsSufficient Assumption

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

A retrospective study is a scientific study that tries to determine the causes of subjects' present characteristics by looking for significant connections between the present characteristics of subjects and what happened to those subjects in the past, before the study began. Because retrospective studies of human subjects must use the cannot reliably determine the causes of human subjects' present characteristics.

What this question is testing

Sufficient Assumption

Your task

Find the assumption that, if added, guarantees the conclusion follows.

Common trap

Answers that only partly bridge the gap, leaving the conclusion unproven.

Winning move

Identify the new term in the conclusion and pick the choice that links it to the evidence.

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 assumed, enables the argument's conclusion to

Answer choices

  1. Too Weak8% picked this

    Whether or not a study of human subjects can reliably determine the causes of those subjects' present characteristics may depend at least in part

    This builds a bridge between the right terms, but is too weak to ensure the conclusion is properly drawn.

  2. Wrong Trigger8% picked this

    A retrospective study cannot reliably determine the causes of human subjects' present characteristics unless there exist correlations between the present characteristics of the subjects

    This can be rewritten as a R ? C retrospective study can reliably determine the causes of human subjects’ present characteristics only if there exist correlations between the present characteristics of the subjects and what happened to those subjects in the past. This assumes that there ~C are no correlations between the present characteristics of the subjects and what happened in the past.

  3. Correct75% picked this

    In studies of human subjects that attempt to find connections between subjects' present characteristics and what happened to those subjects in the past, the

    Why this is right

    This bridges the gap between SR ? ~R relying the subjects’ reports and reports which are not reliable.

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

  4. Weaken5% picked this

    If a study of human subjects uses only accurate reports about the subjects' pasts, then that study can reliably determine the causes

    This makes it more likely that retrospective studies can reliably determine the causes of those subjects’ present characteristics.

  5. Supports a Premise / Out of Scope4% picked this

    Every scientific study in which researchers look for significant connections between the present characteristics of subjects and what happened to those subjects in the

    This statement supports the argument’s premise. It also contains information about other types of study that is not relevant to the argument.

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