LSAT 155 – Section 1 – Question 04

LSAT 155 - Section 1 - Question 04

November 2019

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

Target time: 1:23

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
PT155 S1 Q04
+LR
+Exp
Most strongly supported +MSS
PSA - Find the rule +PSAr
Critique or Debate +CritDeb
Rule-Application +RuleApp
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
95%
161
B
1%
148
C
1%
143
D
0%
141
E
3%
149
126
134
141
 +Easiest 147.037 +SubsectionMedium

Zahler Motors executive: The Graham Motor Company should stop running its deceptive minivan commercial, which claims that Graham’s minivan has a foldable third-row seat while our minivans do not. Zahler’s minivan from the newest model year, which recently began arriving at dealers, has a foldable third-row seat.

Graham Motor Company executive: Our commercial is not misleading. Zahler dealers are still selling new minivans from the previous model year, which lack a foldable third-row seat.

Summary

Zahler Motors executive: The Graham Motor Company should not run its deceptive minivan commercial. Why? Because the commercial claims that Graham’s minivan has a foldable third-row seat and Zahler’s do not. Actually, our newest model of mini van does have a foldable third-row seat.

Graham Motor Company executive: Graham’s commercial is not misleading. Zahler is still selling older minivans that lack a foldable third-row seat.

Strongly Supported Conclusions

It is not misleading to claim that a product has a feature that a competing product lacks in some cases.

A
It is not misleading for a company to advertise that its product has a feature that a competing product lacks if some instances of the competing product that are currently offered for sale lack the feature in question.

This answer is strongly supported. Graham argues the commercial is not misleading solely because there are some minivans being sold by Zahler that do not have a third-row seat.

B
It is not misleading for a company to advertise that its product has a feature that a competing product lacks if company executives are unaware that the competing product has the feature in question.

This answer is anti-supported. The Graham executive is aware that there are some instances the competing product has the feature in question. Graham’s argument is that not all minivans sold by Zahler have this feature.

C
It is not misleading for a company to advertise that its product has a feature that a competing product lacks if most consumers would not choose the product solely or primarily on the basis of whether it has that feature.

This answer is unsupported. We don’t know what features are deciding factors for consumers.

D
It is misleading for a company to advertise that its product has a feature that a competing product lacks if, on balance, the competing product has more of the features that most consumers want.

This answer is unsupported. We don’t know what features most consumers want.

E
It is misleading for a company to advertise that its product has a feature that a competing product lacks if all instances of the competing product that are currently offered for sale have the feature in question.

This answer is anti-supported. Not all of the minivan Zahlers sell have the feature in question according the the Graham executive.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 155 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply