Strengthen Questions Analyzed

Please take a moment to complete the following problem:
1. Advertisement: At most jewelry stores, the person
assessing the diamond is the person selling it so
you can see why an assessor might say that a
diamond is of higher quality than it really is.
But because all diamonds sold at Gem World
are certified in writing, you’re assured of a fair
price when purchasing a diamond from Gem
World.
The reasoning in the advertisement would be most
strengthened if which one of the following were true?
(A) Many jewelry stores other than Gem World also
provide written certification of the quality of
their diamonds.
(B) The certifications of diamonds at Gem World
are written by people with years of
experience in appraising gems.
(C) The diamonds sold at Gem World are generally
of higher quality than those sold at other
jewelry stores.
(D) The diamond market is so volatile that prices of
the most expensive diamonds can change by
hundreds of dollars from one day to the next.
(E) The written certifications of diamonds at Gem
World are provided by an independent
company of gem specialists.
The stimulus is prefaced by the word “advertisement.” One quirk of the LSAT
is that every stimulus in LSAT history that has been preceded by this word has
contained faulty or deceptive logic. Thus, whenever you see this word
prefacing a stimulus, be on the lookout for misleading or flawed reasoning.
The argument is constructed as follows:
Premise: At most jewelry stores, the person assessing the diamond is
the person selling it.
Premise/Sub-conclusion:
So you can see why an assessor might say that a diamond is
of higher quality than it really is.
Premise: All diamonds sold at Gem World are certified in writing,
Conclusion: You’re assured of a fair price when purchasing a diamond
from Gem World. The first sentence contains a premise and conclusion that relies on the
assumption that financial motivation might cause a person to lie about the
quality of the item. According to the advertisement, at Gem World there is no
such worry because the diamonds are certified in writing. Think for a
moment—does that reasoning sound bulletproof? If you were standing there in
the store and you were told that Gem World has written certification, wouldn’t
you ask who does the certification? This is the essence of personalizing the
argument—place yourself inside the situation and think how you would react.
As soon as you do that in this question, the weakness in the argument becomes
apparent. Then, since this is a Strengthen question, you can look for an answer
choice that eliminates this weakness. Answer choice (E) addresses the hole in
the argument by indicating that the individuals who provide the written
certification are not the same people who are selling the diamonds at Gem
World.
There are other errors in the stimulus, such as assuming that a written
certification equals a fair price. The certification may have no impact on the
actual price of the diamond, or perhaps it could even be used to raise the price
unjustly. These problems are ignored by the answer choices, and the test makers
have that right.
Answer choice (A): The conclusion addresses the fair price of diamonds at
Gem World, not other stores. Hence, the fact that other stores have written
certification does not help the Gem World advertisement.
Answer choice (B): This is an answer many people keep as a Contender. The
answer is incorrect because it fails to address the point raised in the first
sentence, namely that the person assessing the diamond has a personal stake in
the outcome. This “accountability” issue is the central point of the argument,
and without knowing the source of the certifications, this answer does not
strengthen the argument.
Answer choice (C): The argument asserts that a fair price is assured when
purchasing a diamond at Gem World. No claim to comparative quality is made
in the advertisement, and thus this answer does not strengthen the argument.
Answer choice (D): If anything, this answer may hurt the argument since it
indicates that a fair price may not be obtainable at Gem World due to price
volatility. If prices change daily, then Gem World may be selling diamonds at a
price that does not reflect current market value. However, the answer choice
specifically mentions “the most expensive diamonds” and there is no guarantee
that Gem World carries diamonds in this price range. So, at best, the answer
choice has no effect on the argument and is therefore incorrect.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer. As mentioned above, this answer
addresses the separation of the certification writer from the seller and thereby
strengthens the reasoning.
Please take a moment to complete the following problem:

2. Statistician: A financial magazine claimed that its
survey of its subscribers showed that North
Americans are more concerned about their
personal finances than about politics. One
question was: “Which do you think about
more: politics or the joy of earning money?”
This question is clearly biased. Also, the readers
of the magazine are a self-selecting sample.
Thus, there is reason to be skeptical about the
conclusion drawn in the magazine’s survey.
Each of the following, if true, would strengthen the
statistician’s argument EXCEPT:
(A) The credibility of the magazine has been called
into question on a number of occasions.
(B) The conclusions drawn in most magazine
surveys have eventually been disproved.
(C) Other surveys suggest that North Americans are
just as concerned about politics as they are
about finances.
(D) There is reason to be skeptical about the results
of surveys that are biased and
unrepresentative.
(E) Other surveys suggest that North Americans are
concerned not only with politics and
finances, but also with social issues.
This problem is more difficult than the previous problem, in part because this is
an Except question. As you recall, in a Strengthen Except question the four
incorrect answers strengthen the argument and the correct answer either has no
effect on the argument or weakens the argument.
The statistician’s statement begins with a variation of the classic LSAT
construction “Some people claim...” As discussed in Chapter Two, when this
construction is used, the author almost always argues against the claim made by
the people. Here, a financial magazine has claimed that a survey proves that
North Americans are more concerned about personal finances than politics. The
statistician attacks two elements of the survey—there was a biased question and
the sampling was faulty—and concludes the magazine’s claim is questionable.
Let us take a closer look at the statistician’s two premises:
1. One question was biased.
The key to understanding this claim is the phrasing of the question in the
magazine: “the joy of earning money.” By describing politics neutrally
but describing earning money as a fun activity, the question
inappropriately suggests to the magazine reader that one activity is more interesting than the other. This bias undermines the integrity of the
survey.
2. The sample was self-selecting.
A self-selecting sample is one in which individuals decide whether to
participate. As you might expect, only those interested in the topic tend
to participate and this creates a bias in the results. Because the survey
was of subscribers to a financial magazine and not of the general North
American population, those participating in sample are not necessarily
representative of North Americans and thus the magazine cannot
reliably draw a conclusion about North Americans.
Hence, the statistician’s position appears reasonably strong. Nonetheless, you
are asked to eliminate four answers that will strengthen it further.
Earlier in this chapter we mentioned that the test makers believe in the validity
of surveys, polls, etc. This question does not affect that position; in this situation
the survey itself is the topic of discussion. Normally, that is not the case, and
unless a survey or poll is shown to be questionable, you can typically accept the
results knowing that the test makers believe survey results are valid.
Answer choice (A): This answer asserts that the magazine has credibility issues
and thereby supports the conclusion that there should be skepticism regarding
the magazine’s activities.
Answer choice (B): This answer attacks the integrity of magazine surveys, and
therefore supports the idea that there is reason to be skeptical of this magazine
survey. Frankly, this is a weak answer because the validity of surveys in other
magazines do not necessarily reflect on the validity of this magazine’s survey.
Nonetheless, only about five percent of test takers select this answer, as most
people are able to recognize the intent of the test makers.
Answer choice (C): This answer supports the argument because other surveys
suggest that North Americans are not more concerned about finances than
politics. Because this counters the claim of the magazine, the answer supports
the statistician’s conclusion that there is reason to be skeptical of the magazine’s
survey.
Answer choice (D): Because the statistician has shown the survey to be biased
and unrepresentative, this answer choice supports the statistician’s conclusion.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer. The answer has no impact on the
statistician’s argument because a third topic—social issues—was not part of the
magazines’ survey, nor does this answer suggest anything about the preference
of North Americas for finance or politics. Because the answer has no impact, it
is correct in a StrengthenX question.