Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT4 S4 Q11 Explanation

Compared to nonprofit hospitals

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

TopicsWeaken

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

Compared to nonprofit hospitals of the same size, investor-owned hospitals require less public investment in the form of tax breaks, use fewer employees, and have higher occupancy levels. It can therefore be concluded that investor-owned delivering medical care than are nonprofit hospitals.

What this question is testing

Weaken

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion less likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that look negative but attack a claim the argument never relied on.

Winning move

Find the assumption the argument depends on, then pick the choice that undermines it.

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, if true, most undermines the conclusion

Answer choices

  1. Opposite Impact2% picked this

    Nonprofit hospitals charge more per bed than do

    This sounds like another way in which nonprofit hospitals are worse (they charge more per bed). This could be good for the hospital, but it sounds rough for the patient. It's hard to know whether "better way of delivering medical care" is meant to be viewed overall as reflecting the interests of hospitals and patients, or just one of those groups. But it seems more appropriate to interpret it as "overall, a better way", so the upsides/downsides for everyone.

  2. Correct95% picked this

    Patients in nonprofit hospitals recover more quickly than do patients with comparable illnesses

    Why this is right

    If patients in nonprofit hospitals recover more quickly than those with comparable illnesses in investor-owned hospitals, this strongly suggests better quality of care. Faster recovery times imply that the care provided is more effective, undermining the conclusion that investor-owned hospitals are better, as they may be more resource-efficient but not necessarily superior in care quality.

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

  3. Irrelevant Comparison1% picked this

    Nonprofit hospitals do more fundraising than do

    Fundraising activities influence financial strategies, not the quality of medical care delivered. We can't argue that nonprofits are a better way to deliver medical care ... because they rely more on fundraising.

  4. Opposite (if anything)1% picked this

    Doctors at nonprofit hospitals earn higher salaries than do similarly-qualified doctors

    It sounds like doctors benefit at nonprofit hospitals, but the hospitals or patients paying those salaries would be adversely affected. Overall, this adds to the evidence in making nonprofits sound less efficient as a business.

  5. Irrelevant Comparison2% picked this

    Nonprofit hospitals receive more donations than do

    Similar to (C), this relates to funding, not the quality of medical care delivered. We can't argue that nonprofits are a better way to deliver medical care ... because they receive more donations.

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