LSAT 131 – Section 3 – Question 21

LSAT 131 - Section 3 - Question 21

December 2009

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 2:09

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
PT131 S3 Q21
+LR
Most strongly supported +MSS
Net Effect +NetEff
A
23%
162
B
11%
162
C
20%
162
D
3%
156
E
43%
168
158
167
177
 +Hardest 146.026 +SubsectionMedium

Historian: The standard “QWERTY” configuration of the keys on typewriters and computer keyboards was originally designed to be awkward and limit typing speed. This was because early typewriters would jam frequently if adjacent keys were struck in quick succession. Experiments have shown that keyboard configurations more efficient than QWERTY can double typing speed while tremendously reducing typing effort. However, the expense and inconvenience of switching to a new keyboard configuration prevent any configuration other than QWERTY from attaining widespread use.

Summary

The standard QWERTY style of keyboard was designed to slow down typing speed, because it was originally designed for early typewriters. These typewriters could jam if keys were typed too quickly. There exist faster keyboard configurations, but these aren’t used widely, because it would be too expensive and inconvenient to switch away from the QWERTY configuration, which people are used to.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

The original purpose of the QWERTY configuration has resulted in the standardization of a format that doesn’t allow for the fastest typing speed.

If keyboards were designed for something that didn’t jam when typing too quickly, a non-QWERTY keyboard configuration might have been used.

A
Most people who have tried typing with non-QWERTY keyboards have typed significantly more quickly using those keyboards than they usually have done using QWERTY keyboards.

Unsupported, because we only know that there are some faster configurations. There could be many others that are equally slow. And, most people might not be able to type faster even if the configuration makes it possible. They might need training and experience to type faster.

B
Early QWERTY typewriters were less likely to jam than were at least some more recent typewriters if adjacent keys were struck in quick succession.

Unsupported. We don’t have a comparison between early and later typewriters. If anything, we might suspect early typewriters were more likely to jam than later ones, assuming that technology improved in the later ones, allowing for faster typing.

C
If the designers of early typewriters had foreseen the possibility that technology would make it possible for adjacent keyboard keys to be struck in rapid succession without jamming, then they would not have proposed the QWERTY configuration.

Unsupported, because the designers of early typewriters would still be working within the limitations of the then-current technology. They still had to deal with the fact early typewriters could jam if typed too quickly.

D
The benefit to society that would result from switching to a keyboard configuration other than QWERTY is significantly greater than the overall cost of such a switch.

Unsupported, because the stimulus doesn’t give us enough to evaluate the costs and benefits of a new configuration. We know that switching would be costly and inconvenient, and we don’t know whether the benefit of faster typing would outweigh those costs.

E
If the keyboard had been designed for computers, then it would not have been designed to limit typing speed.

Strongly supported, because we know the QWERTY keyboard was designed to limit typing speed because they were designed for early typewriters. If keyboards were designed for something that did not jam when typed quickly, they probably wouldn’t have needed to limit typing speed.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 131 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply