LSAT 16 – Section 2 – Question 11

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

Target time: 1:31

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
PT16 S2 Q11
+LR
Most strongly supported +MSS
A
10%
159
B
4%
162
C
8%
161
D
64%
169
E
14%
164
149
160
171
+Hardest 146.82 +SubsectionMedium

We should recognize this is a most strongly supported question, because the stem asks: Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?

This is a five star question, and getting right is a real test of your ability to recognize the overall issue behind the details and make a key inference. The first sentence is a fairly straight forward conditional, though we should note that it only says that the article can be ruined, not that it will or must be ruined; badly worn needle → article can be ruined. Next we are told that the sewing machine operators in specifically traditional apparel factories monitor their needles and replace those that begin to wear out. We can infer that this practice would prevent at least one potential cause of clothing articles being ruined, but unfortunately we learn sewing operations are becoming increasingly automated, so the operators who monitor needles in traditional factories are being replaced, and it just isn’t efficient to hire people just for monitoring needles. The stimulus ends with a prediction that a new fancy device that detects needle wear is going to become standard equipment of specifically automated apparel factories.

Alright so sewing needles can wear out, and when they do it can ruin the product being sewn. Traditional factories dealt with this problem through human oversight, but since those operators are being replaced in automated factories and it isn’t efficient to hire people who just monitor needles, it seems like there could be a problem. Luckily, it is expected that a new device is going to become standard which uses sound to monitor needle wear, solving the problem. Let’s see what supported inference we get in the answer choices:

Answer Choice (A) This answer is consistent with what we’ve been told, and even might seem to be supported by the prediction of the new device. The problem is that we are only told that the new device is expected to become standard, which means it isn’t certain that it will, while on the other hand we are told that in the traditional factories needles are monitored and replaced. This answer depends on making many assumptions, and is therefore not strongly supported by the information in the stimulus alone.

Answer Choice (B) What we’ve been told actually makes this less likely; human needle monitors aren’t a viable option for an automated factory because it is inefficient to hire people with the sole purpose of monitoring needles.

Answer Choice (C) All we know is that traditional factories don’t use automated equipment instead of human operators for sewing. It is entirely consistent with the stimulus that everything else in traditional apparel factories is automated. This answer requires that we assume a lot about traditional apparel factories that we just don’t know.

Correct Answer Choice (D) This is the correct answer, but it is tricky to pick up on because it relies on making an inference implicit to the stimulus as a whole. The stimulus is all about the problem of needle wear potentially ruining clothing articles, and how humans or devices can be used to monitor needles. If it were true that needle wear occurred at a predictable rate, than it wouldn’t be so important to monitor the needles, since it could be predicted based on the needle’s usage when it would become badly worn. This is a case where maintaining a grasp on the bigger picture of the stimulus is crucial.

Answer Choice (E) This answer is somewhat supported by the fact that it is specifically an acoustic device that can detect needle wear. However, we can’t assume that detection via sound requires that the needles become increasingly loud. What if the noise worn needles make is quieter than good needles? What if it is the same volume but a different kind of noise? This answer wants you to jump on the detail that the devices are acoustic while missing the broader problem and why it supports D.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply