LSAT 153 – Section 3 – Question 06

LSAT 153 - Section 3 - Question 06

June 2019

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:19

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
PT153 S3 Q06
+LR
Weaken +Weak
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Sampling +Smpl
A
0%
148
B
4%
153
C
1%
150
D
9%
153
E
86%
163
138
145
153
 +Medium 146.755 +SubsectionMedium

The best way to increase the blood supply in the city of Pulaski is to encourage more donations by people who are regular blood donors. A study conducted in two other cities—Moorestown and Fredricksburg—indicates that it is difficult and expensive to attract first-time blood donors, and that many sporadic donors are reluctant to give more often. But officials in those cities had considerable success convincing many of their cities’ regular donors to increase their donation frequency.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the best way to increase the blood supply in the city of Pulaski is to encourage more donations by people who are regular blood donors. This is based on a study conducted in two other cities, which showed that officials had a lot of success in convincing regular blood donors to donate more frequently. But it was difficult to attract first-time blood donors.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the city of Pulaski is relevantly similar to the other cities with respect to potential for the cities’ blood donors to increase the frequency of their donation. The author also assumes that there aren’t other ways to increase blood supply besides increasing blood donation frequency or getting first-time donors. (This overlooks the possibility of getting blood from other cities or countries or other sources.)

A
Increasing blood donation by regular donors in Moorestown and Fredricksburg produced a significant increase in the blood supply in those cities.
This strengthens the argument.
B
The pool of potential blood donors in Moorestown and Fredricksburg contained proportionally fewer frequent blood donors than does the pool of potential donors in the city of Pulaski.
This strengthens the argument by suggesting Pulaski might be able to increase its blood supply more than the other cities did through getting regular donors to donate more frequently.
C
A follow-up study in Moorestown and Fredricksburg showed that long-term frequency of blood donation among regular donors remained higher after the promotional campaign than it had been before the campaign.
This strengthens the argument by showing that getting donors to donate more frequently has lasting effects.
D
In the city of Pulaski, the number of sporadic blood donors is significantly greater than the number of regular blood donors.
The author never assumed that there were more regular blood donors than sporadic ones. Regardless of the relative proportion of blood donors, getting the regular ones to donate more can still increase the blood supply.
E
Almost all of the regular blood donors in the city of Pulaski are already giving blood as frequently as is medically safe.
This suggests that getting regular blood donors to donate more frequently might not be a viable solution in Pulaski. If almost all are already donating the maximum amount that’s safe, they are unlikely to donate more frequently.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 153 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply