Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT3 S4 Q23 Explanation

In a new police program

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

TopicsEvaluate

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

In a new police program, automobile owners in some neighborhoods whose cars are not normally driven between 1 A.M.and 5 A.M. can display a special decal in the cars’ windows and authorize police to stop the cars during those hours to check the drivers’ licenses. The theft lower than had been usual for cars in those neighborhoods.

What this question is testing

Evaluate

Conclusion

The author concludes the decal program is reducing theft, based on cars with decals having a lower theft rate.

Evaluate

Pause: who chooses to put a decal on their car? People who are thinking about car theft. Cautious owners. If those same owners also use steering-wheel locks, alarms, garages, and dashcams, then their cars would have lower theft rates whether or not the decal existed.

Imagine a study: Sure — but maybe helmet wearers also bike more carefully, ride safer routes, and avoid traffic. To know whether the helmet itself helped, you need to separate the helmet from the personality of the helmet wearer.

Same here. We need to ask whether the decal-using owners are also taking other measures. If yes, the program's effect is murky. If no, the program's effect is much more credible.

Goal

Find a question about whether decal-using owners take other anti-theft measures.

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.

If it is concluded from the statements above that automobile theft has been reduced by the program, which one of the following would it be most important to

Answer choices

  1. Correct80% picked this

    Are owners who are cautious enough to join the program taking other special measures to protect

    Why this is right

    This is the right question to ask. If decal-using owners are also taking other special measures to protect their cars, the lower theft rate could be explained by those other measures — not by the decal program. Asking this question lets us evaluate whether the decal effect is real or whether it just reflects cautious owner behavior in general. A "yes" answer would weaken the argument; a "no" answer would strengthen it.

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

  2. No Impact2% picked this

    In how many neighborhoods is the police

    The number of neighborhoods running the program does not address whether the program itself causes the lower theft rate. Whether it operates in 5 neighborhoods or 50, the question is whether the decal effect is real or due to owner self-selection. The size of the rollout does not help answer that.

  3. No Impact9% picked this

    Are cars in neighborhoods that are actively participating in the program sometimes stolen

    Daylight thefts in participating neighborhoods are outside the program's window (which runs 1–5 A.M.). The conclusion is about overall theft reduction, but knowing whether daylight thefts happen does not help distinguish program effect from owner caution. Either answer leaves the core question untouched.

  4. No Impact4% picked this

    Will owners who have placed decals on their cars’ windows but who find it necessary to drive between 1 A.M. and 5

    Whether decal-bearing owners get harassed if they need to drive at 1–5 A.M. is a question about the program's side effects, not about whether it actually reduces theft. The conclusion is "theft is being reduced"; this answer addresses an entirely different concern.

  5. No Impact6% picked this

    Are the neighborhoods in which the program has been put into effect a representative cross section of neighborhoods with respect to the

    Whether the participating neighborhoods are representative on car types relates to generalizing the program elsewhere, not to whether the observed reduction in those neighborhoods is caused by the program. The argument's validity in its own context still depends on separating decal effect from owner self-selection — which this answer does not address.

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