Logical reasoning PrepTest 111 · Section 3 · Question 13

Question prompt

President of the Regional Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: D

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Errors in Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

Background - No new businesses have formed or moved into the region for the past decade
Planning Board: Our recent estimate says businesses are leaving at a rate of 4/week
President: There were a max of 1,000 businesses in the area, so at that rate, they’d have all disappeared a while ago, so the Planning Board is overestimating

Answer Anticipation

This argument can be a difficult one to find an error with. After all, if no new businesses formed or moved into the area over the past decade, and 4/week were leaving, that would amount to about 2,000 businesses having left. That’s more than the 1,000 that the President established existed - max - in the region!
However, there is a feature here that we can focus on in order to help us find the flaw, and it’s one that is frequently relevant on the LSAT - the timeline. The new-business formation drought that the President relies on started ten years ago. However, the Planning Board’s estimate of the rate that businesses are leaving the area is “recent.”
The President’s calculations seem to be based off of that rate existing throughout that entire period - after all, if that rate applies only recently (let’s call it two years), then fewer than 1,000 businesses would have left. So the President is applying numbers that are specifically noted as being “recent” to a period stretching over a decade, making her rebuttal flawed. Let’s find an answer highlighting this timeline issue.

Answer choices

  1. A
    focuses on what is Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    The President’s first sentence says that no new businesses have moved or started up in the region over the past decade, so she does consider what is coming into the system - nothing.
  2. B
    confuses a claim about Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    The President establishes both the absolute size of the system (“never more than about one thousand businesses”) and the rate of change - she doesn’t confuse them.
  3. C
    argues against a position Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    The President brings up the rate of businesses leaving an area to prove her point - she doesn’t attack the motives of the Planning Board.
  4. D
    treats a claim about Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem
    The President takes the “recent estimate” and applies it over the past ten years - the timeline she sets over which no new businesses have moved to or entered the area. If 4/week were leaving over that timeline, then her argument holds. If the 4/week is a recent acceleration, then it might not. Since this answer highlights the flaw in the President’s argument, it’s the correct answer.
  5. E
    attacks what was offered Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    The President’s own numbers are estimates/imprecise - “no never more than” and “long ago” aren’t exactly specific in nature! So she’s not criticizing the Planning Board’s numbers as being imprecise.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 10%
  2. B 13%
  3. C 2%
  4. D Credited 70%
  5. E 6%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

  • flaw 1 reply

    Started by Abigail-Okereke

  • Why D? 1 reply

    Started by MasonDees

View all discussions Start a discussion