LSAT 126 – Section 3 – Question 16

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:11

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
PT126 S3 Q16
+LR
Most strongly supported +MSS
A
1%
150
B
2%
152
C
96%
163
D
1%
151
E
1%
153
132
138
145
+Easier 144.364 +SubsectionEasier

When a threat to life is common, as are automobile and industrial accidents, only unusual instances tend to be prominently reported by the news media. Instances of rare threats, such as product tampering, however, are seen as news by reporters and are universally reported in featured stories. People in general tend to estimate the risk of various threats by how frequently those threats come to their attention.

Summary
In situations that commonly threaten people’s lives (like car crashes and industrial accidents), the news only really reports unusual incidents. However, rare threats like product tampering are prominently reported. Also, people generally estimate the risk of different threats based on how much they hear about those threats.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
The stimulus supports these conclusions:
News media are more likely to report on rare or unusual threats to life than on common threats.
People who estimate risk based on news reports likely underestimate the risk of common threats and overestimate the risk of rare or unusual threats.

A
Whether governmental action will be taken to lessen a common risk depends primarily on the prominence given to the risk by the news media.
This is not supported. The stimulus doesn’t mention or allude to government action at all, so we have no basis to conclude when the government will or won’t act to lessen a risk.
B
People tend to magnify the risk of a threat if the threat seems particularly dreadful or if those who would be affected have no control over it.
This is not supported. The facts given don’t suggest anything about threats seeming dreadful or how much control the people affected have. So, the facts don’t support any conclusion on those points.
C
Those who get their information primarily from the news media tend to overestimate the risk of uncommon threats relative to the risk of common threats.
This is strongly supported. People estimate risk based on how often they hear about threats. The news rarely reports on common threats but often reports on rare threats, so someone who gets information from the news would hear more about rare threats, and thus overestimate them.
D
Reporters tend not to seek out information about long-range future threats but to concentrate their attention on the immediate past and future.
This is not supported. We never learn about what information people tend to seek out, or any other distinction about long-range versus immediate threats. So, we can’t draw any conclusion about this.
E
The resources that are spent on avoiding product tampering are greater than the resources that are spent on avoiding threats that stem from the weather.
This is not supported. All we know is that the news media will report rare threats like product tampering. We don’t know anything about how that might translate to resources being spent on protection.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

Leave a Reply