Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Medium

PT153 S2 Q23 ExplanationCritic: Journalists should have reasonable knowledge

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

TopicsParallel

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

Critic: Journalists should have reasonable knowledge of statistics. If not, they can make errors that misinform the public. For example, based on a clearly flawed interpretation of polling data, one certain candidate would win an election.

What this question is testing

Parallel

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
23.

The pattern of reasoning in the criticʼs argument is most similar to that in which one of

Answer choices, explained

  1. Missing 2nd Premise5% picked this

    Before being issued a driver?s license, an applicant should demonstrate an understanding of the environmental effects of driving a fossil fuel-powered car and be

    I would keep this on a first pass, because it has a Conclusion saying "X's should be Y" and a Premise saying "if they're not, something bad". But it loses out to the correct answer, because the latter also has an example like in the original argument, whereas this argument doesn't have an example.

  2. Correct73% picked this

    All elementary schools should have recess time. Otherwise, children can incur health risks due to insufficient exercise. As a case in point, in a

    Why this is right

    This matches all three ingredients. Elem schools should have X should be Y. recess. Otherwise, kids incur if not Y, bad. health risks. A case in point is .... Example: ~Y, bad

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

  3. Missing 2nd Premise5% picked this

    International travelers should have to be processed through border security at each frontier they cross. The inconvenience this might cause is something travelers must

    Just like (A), this has the "X should be Y" and the "otherwise, something bad" parts. But neither of them had the example, like (B) and the original did. Also, this one has a ruled out competing interest, which the original did not have.

  4. Bad Premise Match9% picked this

    All public officials should study ethics prior to or while holding their official position. The study of ethics would enable officials to anticipate the

    This is missing both premises. There's no premise saying "If they don't study ethics prior, something bad happens", and there's no example of that playing itself out.

  5. Missing 2nd Premise8% picked this

    Toy manufacturers should be required to record the place and date a toy was made on the toy itself. Otherwise, if the information is

    Just like (A) and (C) this has the conclusion "X should be Y" and the 1st premise "Otherwise, something bad", but it lacks the example that the original and (B) have.

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