LSAT 118 – Section 3 – Question 01

LSAT 118 - Section 3 - Question 01

December 2004

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:59

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT118 S3 Q01
+LR
+Exp
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Value Judgment +ValJudg
A
0%
144
B
96%
166
C
2%
156
D
1%
162
E
1%
161
124
134
144
 +Easiest 146.785 +SubsectionMedium

Yuriko: Our city’s campaign to persuade parents to have their children vaccinated ought to be imitated by your city. In the 16 months since the enactment of legislation authorizing the campaign, vaccinations in our city have increased by 30 percent.

Susan: But the major part of that increase occurred in the first 6 months after that legislation was enacted, right after your city’s free neighborhood health clinics opened, and before the vaccination campaign really got going.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
Susan implicitly concludes that Yuriko’s argument does not support the conclusion that her city’s campaign to encourage child vaccination should be imitated by Susan’s city. Susan points out that the increase in vaccination in Yuriko’s city mostly preceded the start of the campaign, and more directly followed the opening of free health clinics. This implies that the clinics really caused the increase.

Describe Method of Reasoning
Susan counters Yuriko’s support for the campaign by introducing additional evidence to undermine Yuriko’s assumptions about cause and effect. With evidence about the timing of the rise in vaccination relative to the start of the campaign and the clinics opening, Susan points out a more plausible alternative cause for the rise in vaccination.

A
She denies Yuriko’s assumption that Susan’s city wants to increase the vaccination rate for children.
Susan doesn’t make any assertions about whether or not her city wants to increase the vaccination rate.
B
She cites facts that tend to weaken the force of the evidence with which Yuriko supports her recommendation.
Susan cites the fact that free clinics opened directly before the major rise in vaccination rate, whereas the campaign only started after that rise. This weakens the evidence for Yuriko’s claim that the increase resulted from the campaign.
C
She introduces evidence to show that the campaign Yuriko advocates is only effective for a short period of time.
Susan doesn’t concede that the campaign was effective at all in her argument, for any amount of time.
D
She advances the claim that a campaign such as Yuriko recommends is not necessary because most parents already choose to have their children vaccinated.
Susan doesn’t argue that any campaign for increased vaccination is unnecessary, only that the particular campaign that Yuriko argues Susan’s city should imitate may not be effective.
E
She presents evidence to suggest that vaccination campaigns are usually ineffective.
Susan doesn’t make any claims against the effectiveness of vaccination campaigns in general, only the specific campaign that Yuriko argues Susan’s city should imitate.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 118 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply