LSAT 131 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q4

LR Question 4 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: On a short trip a driver is more likely to have an accident

QUESTION TYPE: Paradox

PARADOX: On short trips, passengers cause car accidents. On long trips, passengers prevent them.

ANALYSIS: The stimulus says that on short trips passengers probably distract drivers. But what might they do on long trips?

On long trips, drivers tend to get sleepy. Maybe passengers help keep them alert, or take over driving.

I thought of this from outside knowledge before looking at the answers. Making this kind of prediction can speed you up. Of course, you have to be prepared for the possibility that you won’t predict it correctly.

___________

1. We don’t care how often people take trips of each type. We care about how passengers affect the accident rate when they are taking that type of trip.
2. This isn’t relevant. This would perhaps show that long trips have a lower accident rate. But the stimulus wasn’t comparing overall accident rates. Instead, the stimulus was asking what effect a passenger had.
   So maybe a good driver on a long trip has an accident rate of 2 per 1000 trips, but with a passenger it is 1 per 1000 trips.
3. CORRECT. This explains it: alert drivers have fewer accidents.
4. The stimulus didn’t make a distinction between cars with one passenger and more than one passenger. So this information is irrelevant.
5. This is similar to A and B. We don’t care how many trips people take. We care about what effect passengers have on their accident rate.
   So maybe short trips have an accident rate of 0.5 per 1000, but with a passenger it is 1 per 1000.