Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT150 S3 Q11 Explanation

Many newspapers have cut back on book reviews

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

TopicsMain Conclusion

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

Many newspapers have cut back on book reviews, replacing them with other features that, according to focus group research, are of greater interest to potential readers. Such a move is ill-advised. Though meant to increase readership, it actually decreases readership by alienating loyal readers likely to watch television than pick up a newspaper.

What this question is testing

Main Conclusion

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
11.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion drawn in

Answer choices

  1. Correct81% picked this

    The newspapers should not have cut back on

    Why this is right

    This is a meaning match for "cutting back on book reviews is ill-advised".

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

  2. Background Fact0% picked this

    Many newspapers have cut back on book reviews, replacing them with

    This refers to the 1st sentence, but the 2nd sentence is our conclusion.

  3. Not Stated / Inference0% picked this

    Focus group research concluded that features other than book reviews were of greater interest

    This is an inference you could pull from the first sentence. We are looking for something that matches the explicit meaning of the second sentence.

  4. Last Sentence Trap14% picked this

    The move to replace book reviews with other features was meant to increase readership, but

    This is the last sentence, which is very, very rarely the Conclusion on Main Conclusion. The conclusion was the second sentence. This answer could be tricky if people used the Support Test, because if you asked "Why should I believe this?" you could answer with the rest of the last sentence .... "because it alienates loyal readers while catering to casual readers". But that would still only make this an Intermediate Conclusion, since it supports the author's opinion that "this was an ill-advised move".

  5. Premise4% picked this

    The move to replace book reviews with other features alienates loyal readers and caters

    There is no support offered for this idea, so it can't be the Conclusion. Our conclusion was in the 2nd sentence.

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