Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: A critic says a bird study is wrong because it didn't account for the birds' age, but we need to find evidence that the critic didn't actually understand what the researcher was doing.

Conclusion: The critic's objection to Yasukawa's research is likely based on a misunderstanding of that research.

Reasoning: The critic claims Yasukawa's size-based conclusion is wrong because smaller birds are generally younger, implying Yasukawa ignored the age factor.

Analysis: To show the critic is the one who is confused, we need to find a fact that vindicates Yasukawa's methodology. If Yasukawa actually did account for age, or if the study compared birds of the same age but different sizes, the critic's point would vanish. Look for an answer that suggests the researcher was already aware of the age-size correlation and controlled for it. This turns the tables on the critic by showing their 'gotcha' moment was actually addressed in the original study.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

4.

Which one of the following, if true, indicates that the criticism of Yasukawa's research is based on a misunderstanding of it?

Correct Answer
A
If Yasukawa compared a smaller species to a larger species, then the critic’s premise that smaller birds are generally younger than larger ones misfires—the size difference is species-based, not an age proxy, so the criticism rests on a misunderstanding.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep