Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Many car buyers say they care about safety, but because some of them only looked at ads rather than expert reports, the author claims they don't actually care about safety.

Conclusion: Car buyers who relied on advertisements were wrong to claim that safety was important to them.

Reasoning: These buyers did not consult objective sources of safety information, relying instead on promotional materials.

Analysis: The author is making a huge leap from 'how someone researches' to 'what someone values.' To make this argument logically airtight, we need a bridge that connects the two. Specifically, we need an assumption that states you cannot truly value safety unless you use objective sources to verify it. Look for an answer that establishes a requirement: if safety is truly important to a buyer, then that buyer must consult objective information. This would effectively disqualify anyone who only looked at ads from being considered 'safety-conscious.'

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

15.

The argument's conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?

Correct Answer
E
E supplies exactly the needed conditional: anyone for whom safety is an important factor will consult an objective safety source. Given that the ‘other buyers’ did not consult such sources, the contrapositive yields that safety was not important to them, making the conclusion follow.
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