LSAT 148 – Section 4 – Question 17

LSAT 148 - Section 4 - Question 17

December 2016

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

Target time: 1:05

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
PT148 S4 Q17
+LR
Most strongly supported +MSS
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
4%
156
B
91%
163
C
3%
154
D
2%
153
E
0%
152
137
144
151
 +Medium 147.694 +SubsectionMedium

When expert witnesses give testimony, jurors often do not understand the technical information and thereby are in no position to evaluate such testimony. Although expert witnesses on opposite sides often make conflicting claims, the expert witnesses on both sides frequently seem competent, leaving the jury unable to assess the reliability of their testimonies.

Summary
Jurors often do not understand the technical information provided by expert witnesses. Although these expert witnesses may make conflicting claims, both appear confident, leaving juries unable to assess how reliable their testimonies are.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
Juries may be swayed by factors other than reliability in a trial with expert testimony.

A
There should be limits placed on how much technical information can be considered by both sides in preparing a legal case.
This is too strong. The stimulus does not advocate for any limits to be placed on technical information. It purely focuses on jurors’ ability to understand it.
B
Jury decisions in cases involving expert witness testimonies are not always determined by the reliability of those testimonies.
The stimulus argues that jurors often cannot assess the reliability of expert witness testimonies. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that decisions involving expert witness testimonies are not always determined by their reliability.
C
Jurors who understand the technical information presented in a case can usually assess its legal implications accurately.
The stimulus does not explain how jurors utilize accurately understood technical information. While it seems plausible, this is too much of an assumption.
D
Jury members should generally be selected on the basis of their technical expertise.
The stimulus does not argue for any change in how jurors should be selected. This requires many assumptions to be correct.
E
Expert witnesses who testify on opposite sides in legal cases are likely to agree in their evaluations of technical claims.
This is anti-supported. The stimulus says that expert witnesses on opposite sides make conflicting claims.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 148 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply