PrepTest 148
[lcid:3690] Prep Test 148 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3
Logical reasoning
Question prompt
In the earliest video
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.
Question Type
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise Questions
Answer choices
-
AThere are no newer, Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. This answer choice doesn't connect to the new term in the conclusion ("less compelling"), so it can't allow that conclusion to be properly drawn. -
BMost early video games Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. The conclusion specifically limits itself to discussing how players identify with the main character ("in this respect"), so other respects are out of scope. -
CThe technical sophistication necessary Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. Noting that the technical sophistication in the conclusion can't make something "fully compelling" doesn't justify the relative conclusion—that something is less compelling. -
DWhen players cannot easily Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D matches the stem
Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument
Valid or Flawed:
Flawed
Question Type:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise
Stimulus Summary:
Newer video games have more realistic graphics, making it harder for players to identify with the main character, thus making them less compelling.
Answer Anticipation:
Stripping the rest of this stimulus away, the argument boils down to this: New technology has made it harder for players to identify with the main character they control, so it makes the game less compelling. That jumps from a premise about identifying with a character to a conclusion about the game being less compelling. The correct answer, therefore, will connect identifying less with the main character to finding the game less compelling.
Answer Explanation:
This answer connects decreased identification with players finding a game less compelling. This answer is also stronger than the conclusion ("usually" vs. "often"), so it's strong enough to justify the conclusion. This answer is therefore correct.
Key Takeaway:
For Strengthen with Sufficient Premise questions that feature a new term in the conclusion, the correct answer will need to connect a premise to that new term. It can be an easy way to make eliminations—get rid of anything that doesn't mention that new term. -
EIf some aspect of Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. This answer connects the ideas that need to be connected, but it's the reverse of what we're looking for. When answers are phrased as conditionals, we need the premise to align with the sufficient condition and the conclusion with the necessary condition.
What this tests
Discussion
No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.