Logical reasoning question types - Role of a statement and a...

Learning Outcomes

After studying this article, you will be able to identify the logical role that a statement plays within an LSAT argument stimulus. You will distinguish between premises, conclusions, and background facts, accurately analyse questions about argument structure, and apply techniques to "role of statement" and "method of reasoning" question types. You will also learn to spot common traps in answer choices and to use effective work-through strategies to maximise your marks.

LSAT Syllabus

For LSAT, you are required to understand how the different parts of an argument function and how to analyse the way an argument proceeds. This article covers:

• Identifying premises, conclusions, intermediate conclusions, and background information in a stimulus
• Recognising the argumentative role of a highlighted sentence or claim
• Understanding "role of statement" and "method of reasoning" question stems and approaches
• Distinguishing between different answer trap types in argument part questions
• Applying systematic reasoning techniques for common variants of these LSAT Logical Reasoning questions

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. In LSAT Logical Reasoning, what does a "role of a statement" question require you to identify?
   1. Whether the statement is background, premise, conclusion, or other
   2. Whether the argument is valid
   3. The flaw in the argument
   4. The main point of the passage
2. What is an "intermediate conclusion"?
   1. A statement used to support the main conclusion and also supported by a premise
   2. A statement irrelevant to the argument
   3. A synonym for a premise
   4. Another term for background information

3. True or false? A claim that provides evidence for both a premise and a conclusion is always a background statement.

4. Which of the following are common "method of reasoning" question traps?
   1. Answer uses the wrong argument part
   2. Answer summarises the content, not the logic
   3. Answer describes an out-of-scope logical move
   4. All of the above

Introduction

In LSAT Logical Reasoning, you are not only asked to evaluate the truth of statements but also to recognise the function each statement performs in the author's argument. Many LSAT questions highlight a specific sentence or clause and require you to determine its argumentative "role." You must understand the difference between premises (facts or evidence), conclusions (claims being argued for), intermediate conclusions, and sometimes background or opposing viewpoints.

Role of statement and argument part questions come in several forms—typically asking either which logical function a highlighted claim serves, or how the argument progresses logically as a whole. Precision in this area is critical for success.

Key Term: argument part
A statement's specific function in the argument's logical structure, such as premise, conclusion, intermediate conclusion, background, or rebuttal.

ROLES IN LSAT ARGUMENTS

Most LSAT stimuli containing arguments are made up of three main types of statements: premises, conclusions, and sometimes background information or opposing positions. Recognising each is central for role and method questions.

Distinguishing Premises and Conclusions

A premise provides evidence for a claim. A conclusion is the position the author wants you to accept. Some arguments may include multiple steps, with an intermediate conclusion that serves as both a claim and a reason.

Key Term: premise
A statement that supplies evidence or support for another assertion in the argument.

Key Term: conclusion
The main claim that the author seeks to establish on the basis of presented reasons.

Key Term: intermediate conclusion
A claim supported by a premise but that itself is used as evidence for the main conclusion.

Background information introduces context or explains a situation but is not used as a rationale for the argument's central claim. Occasionally, a highlighted statement may summarise or challenge an opposing argument.

Worked Example 1.1

Argument stimulus:

"Experts agree that walkable cities benefit public health. In response, the council plans to build more footpaths. However, building new footpaths will be costly and disrupt traffic, so the plan should not go ahead."

Question: What is the role of "building new footpaths will be costly and disrupt traffic"?

Answer:
This sentence is a premise used to support the conclusion "the plan should not go ahead." It is not the main conclusion and is not background—it actively supports the author's recommendation.

QUESTION STEMS: ROLE OF STATEMENT & METHOD OF REASONING

LSAT Logical Reasoning uses various stems to test your understanding of argument parts and structure. Recognise these to target your approach.

Common stems for "role of statement" or "argument part" questions include:

• "The statement that [quoted text] plays which one of the following roles in the argument?"
• "The claim that [quoted text] figures in the argument in which one of the following ways?"
• "Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played by the claim that...?"

Stems for method of reasoning questions include:

• "The argument proceeds by..."
• "Which one of the following most accurately describes the argumentative strategy used?"
• "X responds to Y by..."

Worked Example 1.2

Stimulus:

"All city gardeners use compost. Maya is a city gardener. Therefore, Maya must use compost. This means she is environmentally conscious."

Question: What role does "Maya must use compost" play?

Answer:
"Maya must use compost" is an intermediate conclusion. It is supported by the first two premises and in turn supports the main conclusion "she is environmentally conscious."

Recognising Logical Indicators

Premise indicators: because, since, for, given that, after all

Conclusion indicators: therefore, so, thus, consequently, it follows that

Intermediate conclusion indicators may not always be explicit

APPROACHING ROLE AND ARGUMENT PART QUESTIONS

When answering a "role of a statement" question, follow these steps:

1. Find the highlighted statement in the stimulus
2. Determine whether it:
   • Provides evidence for another claim (premise)
   • Is a claim being proven (conclusion)
   • Both supports and is supported (intermediate conclusion)
   • Merely sets context (background)
   • Presents/objects to another view (rebuttal or contrast)
3. Carefully read the argument to ensure you have identified the main conclusion.
4. Check for shifts in topic or logic partway through the stimulus

Worked Example 1.3

Stimulus:

"Hybrid cars are praised for reducing emissions, so the city offers subsidies for their purchase. However, subsidies strain the budget, and only benefit wealthier buyers. Therefore, the city should not continue the subsidies."

Question: What is the argumentative role of "subsidies strain the budget, and only benefit wealthier buyers"?

Answer:
This is a premise that supports the main conclusion: "the city should not continue the subsidies." It is not merely background—it's a reason for the author's action.

Common Roles in LSAT Arguments

• Premise: Reason or evidence (because, since, etc.)
• Main Conclusion: Claim the author most wants accepted
• Intermediate Conclusion: Both supported and supporting
• Background: Neutral context or scene-setting
• Counterclaim/Rebuttal: Viewpoint presented to be challenged

Revision Tip

If stuck between premise and conclusion, check which statement everything else in the argument is trying to prove—this is almost always the main conclusion.

APPROACHING 'METHOD OF REASONING' QUESTIONS

These questions ask for a logical summary of how the argument moves from its premises to its conclusion. Unlike role questions (which focus on one specific statement), method questions address the strategy as a whole.

Typical answer choices include:

• "Cites evidence for a general principle and applies it to a particular case"
• "Draws an analogy between two situations"
• "Presents an opposing viewpoint and then challenges it"
• "Draws a general conclusion from specific examples"

To answer:

1. Identify the main conclusion and all premises and structure
2. Paraphrase, in broad logical terms, how the argument supports its main claim
3. Use Process of Elimination to remove answers that:
   • Misdescribe the argument part(s)
   • Copy content rather than logic
   • Refer to a logical structure not present in the stimulus

Worked Example 1.4

Stimulus:

"We should tax sugar. Obesity shortens life. Countries that taxed sugar saw declines in obesity. Therefore, a sugar tax would improve national health."

Question: Which best describes the argumentative method?

A) Draws a causal conclusion from observed effects in different countries
B) Applies a previously proven policy to a new context
C) States a negative feature but does not reach a conclusion
D) Argues from analogy with unrelated actions

Answer:
Choice (A) is correct. The argument uses observable declines in obesity in other countries to infer a causal effect, leading to the conclusion that a sugar tax would improve health.

COMMON PITFALLS AND ANSWER TRAPS

Role and method questions often contain answer choices that:

• Confuse the specific argument part (eg, call a premise a conclusion or vice versa)
• Restate content rather than method (eg, summarise what is said, not the argument's logic)
• Attribute a logical structure not present in the stimulus
• Focus on a side issue or background

Exam Warning

Be careful to distinguish between intermediate and main conclusions. The main conclusion is always the claim that is not supporting any further point.

Summary

Table: Roles and Method Question Comparison

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• How to identify premises, conclusions, intermediate conclusions, and background in argument stimuli
• The difference between "role of statement" and "method of reasoning" questions
• The main roles a statement might play within an LSAT argument
• Systematic approach for breaking down argument structure in these question types
• Process of elimination for answer traps (mislabelling argument parts, summarising content not logic)
• Use of logical indicators to identify argument parts

Key Terms and Concepts

• argument part
• premise
• conclusion
• intermediate conclusion