Logical Reasoning

PT152 · S1 · Q6 Economist: There have been large declines

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

Economist: There have been large declines in employment around the globe, so it’s not surprising that the number of workers injured on the job has decreased.

Background

Since there have been declines in employment (fewer jobs) around the globe, the number of workers injured has gone down.

Surprising Claim

The percentage of workers injured on the job has gone down.

Evaluate

This isn't quite a paradox in the sense that the background information doesn't really make the surprising claim more or less likely. It should just be an irrelevant factor.

All other things being equal, whether you have more jobs or fewer jobs, the percent of workers injured would stay the same.

Goal

We just need four answers that explain why a higher proportion of workers are getting injured.

- perhaps the jobs that remain are the more dangerous ones / the jobs we lost were the safer ones

- perhaps the employees that remain with jobs are the more injury-prone ones / the employees that got fired were the safer ones

6.

Each of the following, if true, helps to explain the surprising result mentioned by the economist EXCEPT:

  1. Overall, people who are employed

    Explains Lower Percentage

    If people who have jobs are working fewer hours, on average, then that should bring the injury rate down. The less you're at work, the less you're at risk of being injured at work.

    3% picked this

  2. A decrease in the demand

    Explains Lower Percentage

    When there's less pressure to meet production quotas and deadlines, people can work in a calmer, safer fashion. Injuries often occur when we're tired, distracted, stressed, or hurrying.

    3% picked this

  3. Some of the most dangerous

    Explains Lower Percentage

    If a lot of the jobs that were lost were in dangerous industries, then the remaining pool of jobs is "safer" than the old pool of jobs.

    4% picked this

  4. Correct

    There has been a general

    Why this is right

    This doesn't explain why the injury rate went down. This sounds like a reason why the injury rate should be going up! Less spending on workplace safety would generally mean a less-safe workplace.

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

    85% picked this

  5. Inexperienced workers have lost their

    Explains Lower Percentage

    If more of the lost jobs were for inexperienced workers, the remaining pool of workers is more experienced than before. Is there a common sense connection between experience and avoiding injury? Yes. If you think about jobs that are likely to have injuries in the first place (manufacturing, construction, building maintenance), it's easier to imagine a "rookie" getting injured than a savvy veteran.

    5% 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