Unplugged Practice Test: Logical Reasoning Set 3, Question 25 (Parallel Reasoning)
Taking the test? Finish it first. This page shows the answer.
- Parallel Reasoning questions ask you to match the argument's structure.
- Strip the argument down to its skeleton and ignore the topic. Then find the choice with the same skeleton and the same strength of conclusion.
- Every question on this test is original, written to the same logical skeletons as real questions, and Steve checked every one himself before release.
The question
Fewer of the eastern line's night trains than of its day trains carry a dining car, even though the line runs more night trains than day trains. Therefore, a dining car is found on a larger share of the line's day trains than of its night trains.
25. The pattern of reasoning in which one of the following arguments is most similar to that in the argument above?
- (A)More suburban clinics than rural clinics offer weekend hours. So weekend hours are available at a smaller share of rural clinics than of suburban clinics.
- (B)Fewer rural clinics than suburban clinics offer weekend hours. For although rural clinics outnumber suburban clinics, weekend hours are available at a larger share of suburban clinics than of rural clinics.
- (C)More suburban clinics than rural clinics offer weekend hours, so rural clinics outnumber suburban clinics, since weekend hours are available at a larger share of suburban clinics than of rural clinics.
- (D)Fewer rural clinics than suburban clinics offer weekend hours, even though rural clinics are outnumbered by suburban clinics. It follows that weekend hours are available at a larger share of suburban clinics than of rural clinics.
- (E)More suburban clinics than rural clinics offer weekend hours, even though rural clinics outnumber suburban clinics. Thus weekend hours are available at a larger share of suburban clinics than of rural clinics.
EWhy (E) is correct
The stimulus gives two premises, fewer night trains than day trains carry a dining car, and night trains outnumber day trains, and draws a share conclusion: day trains get the dining car on a larger share of trips. (E)) mirrors that structure exactly from the other side: more suburban clinics than rural clinics offer weekend hours, even though rural clinics outnumber suburban clinics, so weekend hours cover a larger share of suburban clinics than rural ones. Same two starting facts, with the group that has fewer successes also being the group with more members, and the same kind of share conclusion drawn from them.
Why the other answers are wrong
AWhy (A) is wrong
(A) drops the premise about which group has more clinics altogether; without a totals comparison, a raw count difference in weekend hours says nothing about shares.
BWhy (B) is wrong
(B) turns the argument inside out: it uses the share and the totals as support for a count claim, when the original uses the count and the totals to support a claim about shares.
CWhy (C) is wrong
(C) commits the same reversal in a different spot, treating the totals comparison as the conclusion instead of a premise.
DWhy (D) is wrong
(D) hands the smaller-count group the smaller total too, so nothing forces the share conclusion; in the original, the group with fewer successes is the bigger group, which is what makes the share conclusion follow.
Common questions
What type of question is this?
Parallel Reasoning. Parallel Reasoning questions ask you to match the argument's structure.
How do I get better at Parallel Reasoning questions?
Strip the argument down to its skeleton and ignore the topic. Then find the choice with the same skeleton and the same strength of conclusion. The free LSAT cheat sheet lists the wrong-answer patterns to watch for on every type.
