Easy LSAT Evaluate the Argument Questions Practice Questions

Concept Explanation

LSAT Evaluate the Argument questions require you to identify the specific piece of information that would best help determine the validity or strength of a given argument. These questions function as a hybrid between Strengthen and Weaken question types. When you encounter Easy LSAT Evaluate the Argument Questions, your primary goal is to find the "crucial unknown"—the missing link that, depending on its value, could either make the argument succeed or cause it to fail. To solve these effectively, you should apply the Variance Test: if providing two opposite answers to a question in the choices significantly changes the strength of the conclusion in opposite directions, that choice is the correct answer.

These questions are a core part of the Logical Reasoning section, which tests your ability to analyze the relationship between premises and conclusions. For students beginning their journey, focusing on LSAT Prep fundamentals like identifying the conclusion is essential. According to the Law School Admission Council (LSAC), logical reasoning assesses the ability to determine how different pieces of information relate to one another. In an Evaluate question, you are essentially looking for the question that, once answered, clarifies whether a premise actually supports the conclusion or if a hidden flaw exists.

Solved Examples

1. Example: A local park recently installed bright LED lights to deter crime. Since the installation, the number of reported crimes in the park has dropped by 20%. Therefore, the lights were successful in making the park safer for residents.
   Solution:
   1. Identify the Conclusion: The LED lights made the park safer.
   2. Identify the Evidence: Reported crimes dropped by 20% after the lights were installed.
   3. Find the Gap: Does a drop in reported crimes necessarily mean the park is safer? Perhaps people are just avoiding the park entirely.
   4. Evaluate Question: "Has the total number of people visiting the park decreased significantly since the lights were installed?" If yes, the park isn't safer; it's just empty. If no, the lights likely worked.
2. Example: Company X moved its headquarters to a city with lower corporate taxes to increase its annual net profit. Since the move, Company X has indeed reported a higher net profit than the previous year.
   Solution:
   1. Identify the Conclusion: The move to a lower-tax city caused the increase in profit.
   2. Identify the Evidence: Profit is higher after the move.
   3. Find the Gap: Correlation does not equal causation. Other factors could have increased profit.
   4. Evaluate Question: "Did Company X's operating costs, excluding taxes, remain stable or decrease during the same period?" If costs spiked but profit still rose due to a massive sales jump, the tax move might be irrelevant.
3. Example: Every student who attended the extra weekend study session passed the final exam. Thus, attending the study session is the most effective way to ensure a passing grade.
   Solution:
   1. Identify the Conclusion: The session is the most effective way to pass.
   2. Identify the Evidence: 100% of attendees passed.
   3. Find the Gap: We don't know the passing rate of students who didn't attend.
   4. Evaluate Question: "What percentage of students who did not attend the study session also passed the final exam?" If 100% of non-attendees also passed, the session wasn't the determining factor.

Practice Questions

1. A new law requires all cyclists to wear helmets to reduce the severity of head injuries. Supporters claim this will lower healthcare costs. Which of the following would be most useful to know in evaluating the supporters' claim?

2. Recent data shows that employees who take a 15-minute nap during the workday are more productive in the afternoon than those who do not. Therefore, the CEO concludes that implementing a mandatory nap time will increase the company's overall output.

3. A study found that people who drink green tea daily have lower rates of heart disease than those who do not. The researchers concluded that green tea contains compounds that actively protect the heart.

4. The city council plans to ban plastic bags to reduce litter in the local river. They argue that because plastic bags make up 25% of the river litter, the ban will significantly improve the river's cleanliness.

5. An organic farm saw a 30% increase in crop yield after switching to a new natural fertilizer. The farmer concludes that the new fertilizer is more effective than the previous one used.

6. An investment firm claims that its new algorithm predicts stock market trends with 80% accuracy. They argue that investors using this algorithm will consistently outperform the market average.

7. A university found that graduates with high GPAs were more likely to find jobs within six months than graduates with low GPAs. The university administration claims that high grades are the primary factor employers consider when hiring.

8. A tech company introduced a remote-work policy and noticed a decrease in employee turnover. The management credits the remote-work policy for the improved employee retention.

Answers & Explanations

1. Answer: Whether the cost of enforcing the helmet law exceeds the savings from reduced injury severity. Explanation: If enforcement is more expensive than the medical savings, the "lower healthcare costs" claim is undermined. If enforcement is cheap, the claim is supported.
2. Answer: Whether employees who choose to nap are already more efficient workers than those who do not. Explanation: This addresses a selection bias. If only the most productive people take naps, making it mandatory for everyone might not yield the same results.
3. Answer: Whether daily green tea drinkers are also more likely to engage in regular exercise and healthy eating. Explanation: This identifies a potential confounding variable. If tea drinkers are generally healthier, the tea itself might not be the cause of lower heart disease.
4. Answer: Whether residents will replace plastic bags with other disposable materials that are equally likely to end up in the river. Explanation: If the ban leads to an increase in paper bag litter, the net cleanliness of the river might not improve.
5. Answer: Whether the weather conditions during the year of the new fertilizer were significantly more favorable for crops than in previous years. Explanation: This tests if an external factor (weather) was actually responsible for the yield increase rather than the fertilizer.
6. Answer: Whether the 20% of incorrect predictions result in losses that outweigh the gains from the 80% of correct predictions. Explanation: Accuracy percentage doesn't matter if the few failures are catastrophic. This evaluates the actual "outperformance" claim.
7. Answer: Whether graduates with high GPAs also completed more internships than those with low GPAs. Explanation: If internships are the real reason for hiring, then the GPA claim is weakened. Using an AI Question Generator can help you practice identifying these alternative causes.
8. Answer: Whether other major companies in the same industry also saw a decrease in turnover during the same period. Explanation: If turnover dropped everywhere (perhaps due to a bad economy), then the remote-work policy might not be the cause.

Frequently Asked Questions

How do Evaluate the Argument questions differ from Strengthen questions?

While a Strengthen question asks for information that definitely supports the conclusion, an Evaluate question asks for a piece of information that could either support or weaken it depending on the answer. You are looking for the "hinge" upon which the argument's validity swings.

What is the Variance Test on the LSAT?

The Variance Test is a strategy where you take an answer choice and test its extreme opposite possibilities. If one extreme strengthens the argument and the other extreme weakens it, then that choice is the correct answer for an Evaluate question.

Are these questions common on the LSAT?

Evaluate the Argument questions are less frequent than Flaw or Strengthen questions, typically appearing 1-2 times per section. However, they are essential for a high score because they test your ability to see the "gray areas" in logical structures.

Can I use the same strategies as I do for Weaken questions?

Yes, because identifying the weakness or the "gap" in an argument is the first step for both types. Once you find the gap, the correct Evaluate answer will be the one that asks about that specific gap.

What makes an Evaluate question "easy" versus "hard"?

Easy questions usually have a very obvious gap, such as a simple correlation-causation error. Harder versions involve complex conditional logic or subtle shifts in terminology between the premise and the conclusion.