Logical Reasoning Question Types-Error Correction

Logical reasoning (arguments) error correction problems are very similar in nature to problems that ask the examinee to enhance a particular argument provided by the LSAT examiner. The primary distinction between these two types of questions is that in logical reasoning (arguments) error correction problems, the relationship between the facts and conclusions provided in the problem tend to be more at odds than those in logical reasoning (arguments) argument enhancement problems.

Logical reasoning (arguments) argument enhancement problems may provide a valid, or very close to valid, argument that just needs a little more support to make the proposition strong. Logical reasoning (arguments) error correction problems tend to be erroneous or even contradictory on their face. These error correction problems need some additional fact to bring the existing discord into harmony.

Logical reasoning (arguments) error correction problems are often referred to as paradox problems. This is a bit of a misnomer in that there is actually no paradox at all. The apparent paradox that exists within the statement of the problem is resolved if/when the examinee chooses the correct answer selection.

As is the case with many logical reasoning questions, the answer stem usually notifies the examinee that they are dealing with a logical reasoning (arguments) error correction problem. Phrases such as "select the option that resolves" or "identify the choice that best explains" are strong indicators that a particular problem is a logical reasoning (arguments) error correction problem.

Consider the following example:

In year 1, the Waco Raiders, a professional football team, lost over $1 million dollars as a franchise. The owner of the Raiders claimed that if the Raiders lost money in year 2, he would have to shut down the team. In year 2, salaries of the players rose 15%, attendance was down 20%, and all expenses of the franchise rose by 25%. The Raiders, however, managed to generate $2 million dollars in profit in year 2.

Identify the statement that resolves the apparent inconsistency.

(a) The Raiders won 12 more games in year 2 than in year 1.
(b) The Raiders expanded the seating capacity of their stadium by 75%.
(c) The Raiders greatly increased revenue from concession sales and parking fees.
(d) Every team in the league posted a profit in year 2.
(e) The overall economy of Waco increased by 40%.

The correct answer to the above problem is selection (c). This is because it is the only statement offered that could explain the profit earned by the Raider franchise in year 2. All of the other selections are irrelevant and do not help to resolve the apparent inconsistency presented by the problem. It is important that the examinee understand that selection (c) in this problem, or any correct answer in a logical reasoning (arguments) error correction problem, are not the only possible solutions. For example, another correct selection, if it were offered, could be that the Raiders increased ticket prices, or generated new revenue from television contracts, etc. It is helpful if the examinee identifies the type of problem first and then thinks about possible solutions prior to reading the answer selections. This can assist the examinee in finding the best available answer choice.