I feel like I get these automatically almost every first try idk why. I rarely need to chart them out I feel like process of elimination+hunting and excessive drilling serves me very well
guys I got this one right first try, there's hope lol. Don't sweat the snoring question previously, that's only one kind of strengthen question you could encounter potentially on the LSAT. Just keep going!!
Going through why each of the incorrect answers are wrong is making things more confusing. The way I generally interpreted why the incorrect answers are wrong is that they weaken the argument by introducing plausible alternative hypothesis. I don't know if this is the ideal way to rule these out. It feels like the incorrect answers can be interpreted in sooo many different ways and that my interpretation is never the same as the explanations'.
@Tyson.manis@gmail.com Yes its the new interface starting August 2026. You can still cut the answers on the right side there's an eye with a cross on it, if you click it you can cut through
On these types of questions I'm going to skim the premise, try "ignoring it" and focus on what strengthens the conclusion without needing the premise. Worked for this one at least.
I think coming up with hypothetical alternative hypotheses to then compare the answers to encourages the wrong kind of thinking. The whole curriculum keeps making the point not to assume and keep anchoring back to the stimulus. Process of elimination is truly the best approach for these kinds of questions in my opinion purely based off of like what answer choice seems the most reasonable — least amount of assumptions, directly relevant to what is discussed/concluded in the stimulus and the connection between the premise(s) and conclusion. To come up with a hypothetical alternative hypothesis and use that to check how to strengthen the argument seems counterintuitive and honestly not worth the time it takes… just my two cents
I made a mistake and picked A, ignoring the scope of time which it put out. I need to make sure and be critical of every word in the answer cause even some of it could make the answer choice wrong. Got it right on the blind review but I'll be careful next time
C is the right answer because we need to strengthen the conclusion that large corporations have made it a point to discourage alternative energy projects and that their actions influenced the government's decision to fund them less -
This answer choice strongly supports that this is the case by stating that the ONLY research projects whose funding has been severely curtailed are the ones that large corporations have made a point to discourage. Right on first try and 1 second over.
I feel like reading the explanations for why the other answer choices are wrong are so convoluted and confusing compared to how people see them, I just think that its confusing me more
I got it wrong the first time, but I think doing a blind review and being more critical of grammar and breaking down the sentences/ subgroups helped me achieve a right answer a second time
I think this is a great example of how the phenomenon is NOT the premise. It's the context. The stem here says "strengthen the reasoning", meaning the support relationship from premise: "since large corporations have made it a point to discourage alternative-energy projects" to conclusion: "it is likely that the corporations actions influenced...". Answer choice C specifically strengthens that support relationship (only research projects that corporations discourage get their funding curtailed). Getting sidetracked by thinking the phenomenon as premise and how that premise supports the conclusion makes it much less clear, and primes you for distractors
This is an example of a question that blatantly restates the hypothesis again. I am interested to see what tricks the next questions have up their sleeves
130 comments
I feel like I get these automatically almost every first try idk why. I rarely need to chart them out I feel like process of elimination+hunting and excessive drilling serves me very well
I got it write but my timing is off
That was a level 1? wow
so I got this right, but that was in no way a level 1 question
guys I got this one right first try, there's hope lol. Don't sweat the snoring question previously, that's only one kind of strengthen question you could encounter potentially on the LSAT. Just keep going!!
Going through why each of the incorrect answers are wrong is making things more confusing. The way I generally interpreted why the incorrect answers are wrong is that they weaken the argument by introducing plausible alternative hypothesis. I don't know if this is the ideal way to rule these out. It feels like the incorrect answers can be interpreted in sooo many different ways and that my interpretation is never the same as the explanations'.
Right but not without a fight haha
did anyone's interface look different when they did this one? I didn't have the ability to cross out answers or enlarge the text for some reason
@Tyson.manis@gmail.com I wonder if this is the new testing interface we'll be seeing in the future?
@Tyson.manis@gmail.com Yes its the new interface starting August 2026. You can still cut the answers on the right side there's an eye with a cross on it, if you click it you can cut through
@Tyson.manis@gmail.com Hi! I'm having this issue too, however, what works is refreshing the page to use the tools!
WSE questions are my worst nightmare, I always feel so accomplished getting them correct even if I am way over time... Small wins people, small wins.
I am the king of 1-star questions - Yale law don't be late to our interview.
@SwagOD LOL
Im always going overtime by a minute/two
i got this right with a few seconds to spare, but it felt MUCH more strenuous than a level 1
On these types of questions I'm going to skim the premise, try "ignoring it" and focus on what strengthens the conclusion without needing the premise. Worked for this one at least.
I think coming up with hypothetical alternative hypotheses to then compare the answers to encourages the wrong kind of thinking. The whole curriculum keeps making the point not to assume and keep anchoring back to the stimulus. Process of elimination is truly the best approach for these kinds of questions in my opinion purely based off of like what answer choice seems the most reasonable — least amount of assumptions, directly relevant to what is discussed/concluded in the stimulus and the connection between the premise(s) and conclusion. To come up with a hypothetical alternative hypothesis and use that to check how to strengthen the argument seems counterintuitive and honestly not worth the time it takes… just my two cents
I made a mistake and picked A, ignoring the scope of time which it put out. I need to make sure and be critical of every word in the answer cause even some of it could make the answer choice wrong. Got it right on the blind review but I'll be careful next time
C is the right answer because we need to strengthen the conclusion that large corporations have made it a point to discourage alternative energy projects and that their actions influenced the government's decision to fund them less -
This answer choice strongly supports that this is the case by stating that the ONLY research projects whose funding has been severely curtailed are the ones that large corporations have made a point to discourage. Right on first try and 1 second over.
I feel like reading the explanations for why the other answer choices are wrong are so convoluted and confusing compared to how people see them, I just think that its confusing me more
My brain simply did not absorb what the stimulus was laying out on this one lol
I got it wrong the first time, but I think doing a blind review and being more critical of grammar and breaking down the sentences/ subgroups helped me achieve a right answer a second time
How was that a level one difficulty question? I was a min over!
@MarieChavis Even though it's a level one strengthen question it took me 6 minutes to get it right the first time, imo felt way more than a level one
I think this is a great example of how the phenomenon is NOT the premise. It's the context. The stem here says "strengthen the reasoning", meaning the support relationship from premise: "since large corporations have made it a point to discourage alternative-energy projects" to conclusion: "it is likely that the corporations actions influenced...". Answer choice C specifically strengthens that support relationship (only research projects that corporations discourage get their funding curtailed). Getting sidetracked by thinking the phenomenon as premise and how that premise supports the conclusion makes it much less clear, and primes you for distractors
fried my brain over a level 1 difficulty question. Nice!
@mitch.s Had to google wtf curtailed meant LMAO
I don't see the purpose of trying to figuring out an alternative hypothesis. Especially since we have such time constraints.
how in the world is this a fucking one-star difficulty
This is an example of a question that blatantly restates the hypothesis again. I am interested to see what tricks the next questions have up their sleeves