One common LSAT reasoning question is the kind that asks you to \u201cstrengthen\u201d the argument. The most common mistake that people make on these kinds of questions is failing to stay close enough to the text of the argument as written.<\/p>\n
1. Beasley & Halpert Law Firm has instituted an Employee Wellness Program that will provide attorneys and support staff with free access to Smokers Anonymous programs, diabetes monitoring, and discounted memberships to a local gym. Similar programs at other firm have been shown to improve workplace attendance and performance, and reduce the employer\u2019s costs for employee health insurance. Thus, the Employee Wellness Program will be good for both the employees and the firm.<\/p>\n
If true, which of the following would best support the conclusion of the argument above?<\/p>\n
(A) Many employees take advantage of free diabetes monitoring when it is offered by employers.
\n(B) Smokers Anonymous programs are only effective for 20% of those smokers who use them.
\n(C)) Discounted memberships at a local gym will make it easier for employees to improve their cardiovascular health and reduce the incidence of serious illness.
\n(D) Exercising without the help of a personal trainer can often lead to injury due to incorrect use of weight-training equipment.
\n(E)) Beasley & Halpert will give employees taking part in the Smokers Anonymous program one paid hour off each Friday afternoon to attend the group meetings.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n
Your first step here is to read the question itself, and notice that it\u2019s asking you to find the answer choice that supports, or strengthens, the conclusion. Then, as you read the argument, notice the word thus,<\/i> which is a great clue to guide you to the argument\u2019s conclusion, which is that \u201cthe Employee Wellness Program will be good for both the employees and the firm.\u201d<\/p>\n
The argument\u2019s evidence provides several examples of how to program is good for the firm\u2014it will \u201cimprove workplace attendance and performance, and reduce the employer\u2019s costs for employee health insurance.\u201d But the conclusion talks about benefits for employees as well as the firm, and the argument doesn\u2019t state explicitly how the program will benefit them.<\/p>\n
(A) Many employees take advantage of free diabetes monitoring when it is offered by employers.<\/i><\/strong> (B) Smokers Anonymous programs are only effective for 20% of those smokers who use them.<\/i><\/strong> (C) Discounted memberships at a local gym will make it easier for employees to improve their cardiovascular health and reduce the incidence of serious illness.<\/i><\/strong> (D) Exercising without the help of a personal trainer can often lead to injury due to incorrect use of weight-training equipment.<\/i><\/strong> (E) Beasley & Halpert will give employees taking part in the Smokers Anonymous program one paid hour off each Friday afternoon to attend the group meetings.<\/i><\/strong> One key to success with strengthen questions on the LSAT is to remember that the correct answer shouldn\u2019t take too much work to justify.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>
\nThe monitoring\u2019s popularity might indicate that it is beneficial to the employees, but it might not. This choice doesn\u2019t clearly demonstrate that the Employee Wellness Program benefits the employees, and is a good example of a wrong answer that makes the test-taker work too hard in order to justify choosing it. Here, one would have to assume that employees take advantage of the program because it is beneficial to them. A strengthener shouldn\u2019t require a major assumption, and therefore this choice is not the best answer. Wrong answers like this are common, so watch out for them.
\n<\/i><\/p>\n
\nThis choice makes it LESS likely that the programs will benefit either the employees or the firm. This answer choice may catch your eye if you didn\u2019t read the question closely enough, and are mistakenly looking for a weakener instead of a strengthener.
\n<\/i><\/p>\n
\nThis is the correct answer. The argument seems to imply that the increased attendance and performance and reduced health insurance costs are due to improved employee health, which would naturally benefit the employees. This choice makes that unstated implication clear, and fills the gap in the argument.
\nIf words like unstated<\/i> and gap<\/i> remind you of assumption questions, that\u2019s a good thing! Often, the weakness in an argument is due to the gap left by an unstated assumption, and the best way to strengthen the argument is by explicitly stating the assumption.
\n<\/i><\/p>\n
\nThis answer might be tempting, but again, it requires too many assumptions to tie it into the argument as a strengthener. In order for this to strengthen the argument, one must assume that employees would still exercise without the personal training services, and that they would incorrectly use the weight-training equipment. That\u2019s too much work for the question, and so this answer choice must be rejected.
\n<\/i><\/p>\n
\nThis might benefit the employees, but it would be a burden to Company X. Therefore, it\u2019s not the best choice.<\/p>\n<\/span><\/span><\/div>
\n<\/div>On Test Day<\/h3><\/header>