LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

User avatar
 Ryan Twomey
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 141
  • Joined: Mar 04, 2021
Hey Pavein,

With evaluate questions, you want to remember to do the variance test on what you think is the correct answer choice. The answer choices are all questions, but one response to the question should weaken the conclusion and one response to the question should strengthen the conclusion.

Just like in strengthen and weaken questions, you can consider these responses as premises in the argument, certainly.

If you answer, yes to the question posed in answer choice A, that would increase caffeine and thus increase irritating acid, which would weaken our conclusion.

If you answer no to the question posed in answer choice A, that would eliminate a possible cause to weaken the conclusion, which would in turn strengthen the conclusion.

So that is why A is our correct answer, because one response in the variance test weakens the conclusion and one response strengthens the conclusion. This is a very helpful trick.

I hope all this helps and I wish you all the luck in your studies.

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: May 15, 2021
I’m having trouble finding the part of the stimulus that eludes to a ratio for caffeine:NMP. When I think of the word suppress, I don’t think the amount of something impacts its effectiveness. Can you please clarify what I’m missing?
User avatar
 Bob O'Halloran
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: Jul 06, 2021
HI Marilati,
Thank you for your question.
If we map this question out we can say the following:
1 Caffeine simulates acid production.
2. NMP suppress acid production
3. Darker roasts contain more NMP that lighter roasts
Conclusion: Darker roasts will irritate your stomach less

Answer choice (A) helps us decide how good a argument we have in the stimulus. If darker and lighter roasts contain the same about of caffeine the argument is strengthened. Conversely if the caffeine is higher is dark roasts, this weakens the argument by opening a line of attack on the conclusion.

In this context, the amount of a substance must play a part in the effectives, because otherwise the argument doesn't make sense. If the amount doesn't matter, the evidence that darker roasts have more NMP doesn't help the conclusion that darker roast will irritate your stomach more.

I hope this helps and let us know of any additional questions.

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.