Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT147 S1 Q5 Explanation

Recently, many traffic lights

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

TopicsParadox

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

Recently, many traffic lights and street markings were temporarily removed from a heavily traveled street in a major metropolitan area. Given that this street experiences significant volumes of automobile traffic, the number of accidents on the street was expected to increase. However, in traffic, the number of accidents was greatly reduced.

What this question is testing

Paradox

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

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

The question
5.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent

Answer choices

  1. No Impact0% picked this

    People often disregard traffic lights and

    At best, this might lead us to expect very little difference in the number of accidents after the traffic lights and street markings. We might still expect an increase in the number of accidents once the lights and markings were removed, since it's possible that people sometimes payed attention to them and they were somewhat helpful. In any case, this answer doesn't help explain why the number of accidents was greatly reduced.

  2. Correct99% picked this

    The lack of traffic lights and street markings caused drivers to

    Why this is right

    Driving more cautiously could easily lead to fewer accidents.

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

  3. No Impact0% picked this

    Most drivers were not aware that traffic lights and street markings

    If anything, we would expect this to result in little or no change to the number of accidents. It doesn't help explain why there was a significant change, and why the number of accidents was greatly reduced.

  4. No Impact0% picked this

    Traffic lights and street markings are intended to have benefits in addition to those

    Without more information about the "benefits" described in this answer choice, we have no idea how this would affect the number of accidents that occurred after the traffic lights and street markings were removed.

  5. Weaker Impact Thin Ice1% picked this

    Drivers were given advance notice that the traffic lights and street markings

    We could expect this to lead to fewer accidents if we assume that drivers changed their driving habits in response to the advance notice. We would basically be assuming that this caused drivers to drive more cautiously, which is what choice B explicitly states.

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