Strengthen Questions
Key Takeaways
- A strengthen answer makes the conclusion more likely to follow from the premises; it does not have to prove the conclusion.
- The best strengthener usually supports the argument's gap, not a random premise or the general topic.
- Common strengtheners include controls, mechanisms, representative samples, relevant similarities, and rules that connect premise terms to conclusion terms.
- A correct answer is taken as true, so judge its effect on the reasoning rather than whether it seems likely in real life.
What Strengthening Means
A strengthen question asks you to make the argument better. The answer is assumed true for the purpose of the question. Your job is not to decide whether the answer is realistic; your job is to decide whether it increases confidence that the conclusion follows from the given premises.
Strengthening is less strict than sufficient assumption. The answer can leave uncertainty. It can be partial. It can make the conclusion more likely rather than guaranteed. But it must help the argument's support, not merely mention the same subject.
Stem Signals
| Stem wording | Task |
|---|---|
| most strengthens | increases support the most |
| most supports | helps the conclusion follow |
| if true, provides support | add useful evidence |
| most justifies | may require stronger support, depending on wording |
Read the stem carefully. Some justify stems behave more like sufficient-assumption questions. Most ordinary strengthen stems ask for improvement, not proof.
Strengthen The Gap
First identify the conclusion and evidence. Then ask why the evidence is not enough. That weakness is where the answer should work. If the argument says a tutoring program caused higher scores because participants improved, the gap is causal. Useful strengtheners include a control group, a before-after comparison with no other changes, or a dose-response pattern.
Do not strengthen a premise that is already accepted unless the argument depends on that premise being reliable and the answer addresses that reliability. LSAT arguments generally ask you to accept stated premises. The usual issue is the leap from premise to conclusion.
Common Strengthener Types
| Argument pattern | Useful strengthener |
|---|---|
| Correlation -> cause | controls, mechanism, no alternate cause |
| Survey -> population | representative sample, high response quality |
| Analogy -> prediction | relevant similarity between cases |
| Expert -> conclusion | expertise is relevant, source has good data |
| Plan -> outcome | feasibility, compliance, missing condition met |
| Percent -> amount | base number supports the conclusion |
The right answer often names a condition that would make the author's leap less risky. It need not address every possible objection.
Mechanisms And Controls
A mechanism explains how the cause could produce the effect. If a sleep schedule is said to improve memory, evidence about sleep consolidating memory can strengthen the causal claim. The mechanism does not prove the result happened, but it makes the causal story more credible.
A control rules out competing explanations. If similar people who did not use the schedule failed to improve, the schedule looks more likely to matter. Controls are especially strong on LSAT causal questions because they speak directly to alternative explanations.
Representative Evidence
When an argument uses a sample, a strengthener may show the sample reflects the target population. If a poll of clinic patients supports a conclusion about all clinic patients, evidence that the poll included every major age group, appointment type, and insurance status helps. It does not guarantee perfection, but it makes the inference more reliable.
When an argument compares two places, programs, or time periods, a strengthener may show the comparison is fair. Similar baseline conditions, similar measurement methods, or no major intervening changes can all help.
Avoid Topic Matches
Wrong answers often discuss the topic without helping the argument. If the conclusion is that text reminders reduce missed appointments, a choice saying the clinic has many patients may be irrelevant. A choice saying patients who received reminders missed fewer appointments than similar patients who did not receive them directly strengthens.
Another trap is an answer that strengthens a different conclusion. Evidence that a policy is popular does not necessarily strengthen the claim that it is effective. Evidence that a policy is cheap does not necessarily strengthen the claim that it will reduce delays.
Strengthen Review Questions
- What exactly is the conclusion?
- What is the evidence supposed to show?
- Which assumption or vulnerability connects them?
- Does the answer help that connection?
- Does a different answer help more directly?
The word most matters. Several answers may help a little. The credited answer usually targets the central gap with less indirection.
Strong Language And Scope
Do not reflexively reject strong answer language. A choice saying all relevant records were checked can be an excellent strengthener if the argument relies on an absence of records. But strong language aimed outside the conclusion is useless.
Similarly, a soft answer can be correct if it hits the gap. A claim that a surveyed group was broadly similar to the target group may be enough to strengthen a generalization, even though it does not prove representativeness perfectly.
Some strengthen answers work by making a possible objection less serious. If an author predicts compliance, evidence of incentives or prior compliance can help. If compliance is irrelevant to the conclusion, the same evidence is only a topic match.
Timing Strategy
Strengthen questions should begin with a prephrase. Name the gap in one phrase: alternate cause, sample, relevant similarity, feasibility, measurement, or term bridge. Then evaluate answers by effect. If you cannot state the gap, the answer choices will pull you toward true but irrelevant facts.
Because Logical Reasoning is now a large part of the scored multiple-choice LSAT, the payoff from strengthen consistency is high. The repeated skill is not memorizing every possible answer. It is locating the argument's weak link and recognizing which new fact makes that link sturdier.
Library director: Sending text-message due-date reminders will reduce overdue book returns. Many overdue returns happen because patrons simply forget the due date. Which fact, if true, most strengthens the director's argument?