LSAT 67, Reading Comprehension, Q7, LSATHacks

RC Question 7 Explanation, by LSATHacks

DISCUSSION: For an inference question, identify 1-2 answers you think are correct, then look to justify them using the passage.

If you find this takes too long, then practice doing it faster when reviewing. You can learn to find the relevant section of the passage in less than 10 seconds, usually faster.

___________

1. Paragraph 1’s first sentence and last three lines make clear that this is an area of history that isn’t well studied. It doesn’t sound like any of these films are well known.
2. There’s no evidence that the scholar ever worked with Tucker.
3. The author says that Tucker has not been studied in the mainstream (first sentence of paragraph 1). But the author doesn’t say they expect their study of Tucker will be ignored. It would be odd to write a biography if you were pessimistic about it’s reception.
4. CORRECT. Tucker acted in 20 films (second sentence of paragraph 1). Middle of paragraph 2 shows that the author examined Tucker’s 10 remaining films. 10/20 is not a preponderance, which requires at least a majority of the films be studied. It also doesn’t sound like author gave the films much study: he ‘also examined’ the films. They were secondary evidence. Last sentence of paragraph 2 shows that the interviews were the main source of evidence.
5. The author never says what rhetorical structure he uses in his study. He just describes the evidence he’s gathered.

Hi, I'm Graeme Blake

Founder of LSAThacks; I scored a 177 on the LSAT.

I created the LSAT Mastery Seminars, which are part of the Ultimate LSAT Prep Bundle

If you like the explanations you're reading I'm 100% confident you'll enjoy the courses. Satisfaction guaranteed.

---------
Updates:

For updates, sign up for my email list. I update whenever I have new posts.