LSAT-LR Sample Questions & Answers
Argument analysis carries the heaviest weight, zeroing in on assumptions, flaws and ways to strengthen or weaken a claim, followed by inference and paradox questions, parallel and principle-based reasoning, and critical reading comprehension.
Launch the full LSAT-LR simulator →Showing 10 of 20 free samples.
- Question 1Intermediate
Inference and Deduction · Paradox/Discrepancy Resolution
In the nation of Ostrania, the birth rate has been declining for a decade. At the same time, life expectancy has been steadily increasing. Consequently, the average age of the Ostranian population is rising. To counteract this trend, the Ostranian government has offered generous financial incentives for couples to have more children. Despite these incentives being in place for five years, the average age of the population has continued to increase.
Which of the following, if true, does the most to resolve the apparent discrepancy?
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: B
The discrepancy is that the policy intended to lower the average age failed. This option resolves it by showing that two opposing forces are at play. The policy (increasing births) may have had a small effect in one direction, but another, more powerful factor (dramatically increasing life expectancy) overwhelmed it, leading to the net result of a continued rise in average age.
- Question 2Beginner
Reasoning by Analogy and Principle Application · Principle Questions
Policy Analyst: For our city to thrive, we must attract more high-tech companies. These companies bring high-paying jobs, which in turn boosts the local economy. A recent survey shows that a key factor for these companies when relocating is the availability of a highly educated workforce. Therefore, the most effective way for our city to attract high-tech companies is to invest heavily in our local universities.
Which of the following principles, if valid, would most support the policy analyst's argument?
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: C
The argument identifies a desired outcome (attracting tech companies) and a prerequisite for it (an educated workforce). It then concludes the city should invest in the institution that produces the prerequisite (universities). This principle provides the general rule that connects the evidence (the prerequisite) to the conclusion (the investment).
- Question 3Intermediate
Argument Analysis and Evaluation · Flaw Questions
Interviewer: We are looking for a candidate who is both highly creative and exceptionally detail-oriented. Maria, your portfolio demonstrates outstanding creativity. However, your resume contains several typographical errors. Therefore, you are not a suitable candidate for this position.
The interviewer's reasoning is flawed because it:
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: C
The flaw is a form of hasty generalization. The interviewer finds one instance of a lack of attention to detail (typos on a resume) and concludes that Maria is not 'exceptionally detail-oriented' in general. It's possible for a detail-oriented person to make a mistake on one document. The argument treats this one piece of negative evidence as conclusive proof, which is a logical leap.
- Question 4Beginner
Critical Reading and Comprehension · Main Point/Conclusion Identification
A new law requires that all new buildings in the city meet a 'Green Star' energy efficiency standard. This standard necessitates the use of advanced, expensive materials and construction techniques. While the long-term goal is to reduce the city's overall energy consumption, an immediate consequence will be a sharp increase in the cost of new housing. Since the city already faces a severe housing affordability crisis, this new law will inevitably harm the city's poorest residents the most.
The central claim of the argument is that:
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: B
The argument builds a chain of reasoning: the law requires expensive materials, which increases housing costs, and given the existing affordability crisis, this will harm the poorest residents. The final sentence is the main conclusion that the entire passage is structured to support. The other options are premises or intermediate conclusions used to build up to this final point.
- Question 5Advanced
Argument Analysis and Evaluation · Assumption Questions
Company policy states that any employee who accesses confidential client data must have both Level-2 security clearance and be working on that client's specific project. Jones is working on the Apex project and has Level-2 security clearance. Therefore, Jones is permitted to access confidential data for the Apex project.
Which of the following must be true for the conclusion to be properly drawn?
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: C
The policy, as stated, presents necessary conditions ('must have both'). The conclusion treats them as sufficient conditions (if you have them, you are permitted). For the conclusion to be valid, this unstated sufficient assumption must be true. The original rule says P -> (A and B). The argument concludes (A and B) -> P. This option explicitly states that the conditions are sufficient, bridging the logical gap perfectly.
flowchart LR subgraph Policy_Rule [Necessary Conditions] Permission --> L2{Level-2 Clearance} Permission --> Project{On Project} end subgraph Argument_Conclusion [Sufficient Conditions] L2_and_Project{L2 AND On Project} --> Has_Permission[Has Permission] end Gap[Logical Gap] -- Bridges --> Argument_Conclusion Policy_Rule -- Fails to Justify --> Has_Permission - Question 6Intermediate
Inference and Deduction · Inference Questions (Must Be True)
Only members of the university's mountaineering club are permitted to use the indoor climbing wall. Furthermore, to be a member of the mountaineering club, one must pass a rigorous safety certification test. Alicia has not passed the safety certification test. Therefore, Alicia is not permitted to use the indoor climbing wall.
If the statements above are true, which of the following must also be true?
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: B
The argument structure is a valid chain of conditional logic. Let CW = Use Climbing Wall, MC = Member of Club, ST = Passed Safety Test. The premises are: 1) CW -> MC. 2) MC -> ST. We can combine these to get CW -> ST. The contrapositive is
ST -> ~CW. The argument states Alicia has not passed the test (ST) and concludes she cannot use the wall (~CW), which is a valid deduction. Therefore, the conclusion must be true.sequenceDiagram participant A as Premise 1 participant B as Premise 2 participant C as Conclusion A->>B: Use Wall (CW) --> Member (MC) B->>C: Member (MC) --> Pass Test (ST) Note over A,C: Combined: CW --> ST Note over A,C: Contrapositive: Not ST --> Not CW C-->>A: Alicia is Not ST, therefore Not CW. (Valid) - Question 7Intermediate
Argument Analysis and Evaluation · Strengthen Questions
A study of a large corporation found that employees who participated in the company's voluntary wellness program had, on average, 25% lower healthcare costs than employees who did not participate. The corporation's management concluded that the wellness program was directly responsible for these savings.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the management's conclusion?
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: C
The main weakness of the conclusion is self-selection bias: perhaps healthier employees were more likely to join the program in the first place. This option strengthens the causal link by providing a baseline comparison. If both groups had similar costs before the program, it makes it much more likely that the program itself is the cause of the difference in costs after its implementation.
- Question 8Beginner
Argument Analysis and Evaluation · Flaw Questions
Political commentator: The prime minister claims her new trade agreement will boost the national economy. But the prime minister's approval ratings are at an all-time low, and her party is embroiled in a corruption scandal. Clearly, this trade agreement is bad for the country.
The commentator's argument is flawed in that it:
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: A
This is a classic ad hominem fallacy. The commentator does not address any specific details or potential flaws of the trade agreement itself. Instead, the argument attacks the prime minister's credibility (low approval ratings, party scandal) and uses that as the sole reason to reject the policy.
- Question 9Advanced
Argument Analysis and Evaluation · Flaw Questions
Movie reviewer: The latest film from director Anya Sharma is a masterpiece of subtlety. Its narrative is intentionally ambiguous, its characters' motivations are deliberately obscured, and its ending resolves none of the central conflicts. Any viewer who complains about the film being 'confusing' has simply failed to appreciate its sophisticated, unconventional storytelling.
The reasoning in the review is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it:
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: B
This is a form of circular reasoning. The argument's conclusion is that the film is sophisticated. Its evidence is that features like ambiguity and unresolved conflict are signs of this sophistication. It then dismisses any potential counter-evidence (e.g., that the film is confusing) by defining that criticism as a viewer's failure to appreciate the very sophistication it claims exists. It essentially says 'The film is good, and if you think it's bad, it's because you don't understand how good it is.'
- Question 10Intermediate
Critical Reading and Comprehension · Role/Function Questions
The principle of 'culinary fusion' holds that combining elements from different culinary traditions can create innovative and superior dishes. For instance, a chef might use a French cooking technique on a traditional Japanese ingredient to create a new flavor profile. However, some critics argue that this practice often disrespects the cultural origins of the food and results in dishes that are an inauthentic caricature of both traditions. Therefore, the practice of culinary fusion is fundamentally flawed and should be abandoned.
The final sentence, 'Therefore, the practice of culinary fusion is fundamentally flawed and should be abandoned,' plays which of the following roles in the argument?
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: B
The author presents two viewpoints: the principle of culinary fusion and the critics' argument against it. The author then uses the critics' argument as evidence to support their own final judgment. The word 'Therefore' is a strong indicator that this final sentence is the main conclusion the author is advocating for, based on the preceding information.
Ready for the real thing?
The full LSAT-LR simulator has every exam-style question, timed mode, and instant scoring.