LSAT 107 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q21

LR Question 21 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: A study of the difference in earnings between men and…

QUESTION TYPE: Paradox

PARADOX: Women with full time jobs earn 80% of what men earn. But all women earn only 65% of what men earn.

ANALYSIS: This is not that complicated. Don’t get caught up in the answer choices. Think about the question for a moment before looking at them.

Who earns less than a full time worker? A part time worker does.

If more women than men work part time then that explains why the average woman earns less than the average woman who works full time. That’s answer choice D.

___________

1. This past trend explains nothing about the present difference between the wages of full time women workers vs. all women.
2. This shows that wage discrimination isn’t a factor if men and women have the same jobs. But this doesn’t explain why all women earn less than women who work full-time jobs.
3. “A growing proportion” could still be a very small percentage, eg. 2%. This doesn’t explain much, and it does nothing to explain the gap between women who work full time and all women.
4. CORRECT. If many women work part time then that could explain why the average women’s wage is less than the average wage of a woman who works full time.
5. Other countries are irrelevant to the situation in Naota.

Recap: The question begins with “A study of the difference in earnings between men and”. It is a Paradox question. Learn how to master LSAT Paradox questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning question types page.