Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: Ebsen sent out a small batch of diverse ads and spent a lot of money checking the results, leading the author to believe this was a trial run rather than a full-scale blitz.

Conclusion: The purpose of Ebsen's recent campaign advertisements was to test how well those ads could sway public opinion.

Reasoning: The ads reached too few people to be a standard influence campaign, covered many topics, and were followed by expensive research to measure their impact.

Analysis: The word 'evidently' is a major clue here, signaling the author's inference. The first two sentences set the stage by ruling out the 'normal' purpose of campaign ads, while the final sentences provide the evidence for the 'testing' theory. Focus on the claim that is being supported by all these observations—the idea that the ads were a pilot study.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

8.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion drawn in the argument above?

Correct Answer
C
C directly states the inference: the ads were sent out to test their potential to influence popular opinion. That’s what the evidence (too few recipients, topic variety, and follow-up measurement) is marshaled to support.
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