Logical reasoning PrepTest 150 · Section 3 · Question 18

Incorrect. While the argument is assuming some similarities between smoking and exercising, the two don't have to have everything in common for the argument to hold together. The two don't have to be equally dangerous for strategies that work on one to work on another.

Incorrect. This answer reflects one of many reasons why the strategy hasn't worked for exercise. Unless we know from the argument that this reason is the key that will make the strategy that works for smoking translate to exercise, it can't be necessary to the argument.

Incorrect. Is this a result of the ads? If so, have exercise ads had similar success in conveying information to the populace? Without more information, we can't analyze how integral this answer is to the argument.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Necessary Premise

Stimulus Summary:
PSAs about exercise focus on the health benefits, and they've failed at getting people to exercise. PSAs focused on the dangers of smoking have succeeded in getting people not to smoke. Therefore, PSAs about exercise would work better if they focused on the dangers of not exercising.

Answer Anticipation:
This question is difficult to anticipate. However, the argument compares focusing on the positive effects vs. the negative effects of something, and relies on smoking and exercise being similar in some ways, so any answer that deals with those issues should be considered.

Answer Explanation:
Let's assume this answer isn't true—that anti-smoking PSAs would be even more effective if they focused on the positive health effects of quitting. If that's the case, then an argument can be made that focusing on the positive effects has more of an impact than focusing on the health dangers. If that's true, and focusing on the positives hasn't worked for exercise, then there's no chance that using the less effective strategy will yield better results! By ruling out the possibility that the strategy already tried to get people to exercise isn't inherently more beneficial than the alternative, this answer serves as a necessary assumption to the argument.

Key Takeaway:
When the LSAT is drawing comparisons, make sure that those comparisons are relevant. When the LSAT makes a prediction about efficacy, make sure that it's giving evidence that supports the method in question actually working.

Incorrect. Health concerns could be driven by a focus on health dangers or health benefits, so this answer choice doesn't distinguish between the two options for PSAs.