LSAT 137 | Section 3 | Logical Reasoning: Q5

LR Question 5 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Dogs learn best when they are trained using both voice…

QUESTION TYPE: Role in Argument

CONCLUSION: Dogs learn most effectively when they are given a mix of voice commands and hand signals.

REASONING: A study split dogs into two groups: Voice training plus hand signals, and voice training alone. The first group was twice as likely to obey.

ANALYSIS: This question asks about the role of the first sentence. It’s the conclusion. The phrase “after all” is a conclusion indicator: what comes before “after all” is the conclusion, and what comes after is the evidence.

___________

1. No, the statement in question is the conclusion. The second sentence is the premise.
2. The implicit assumption is that obeying commands better = learning best.
3. There was no background info given.
    
   Example of background info: Dog trainers have often wondered how to teach dogs best….bla bla bla
4. CORRECT. This is an indirect way of saying “it’s the conclusion”.
5. There is no intermediate conclusion in this argument. The first sentence is the main conclusion.