medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A rehabilitation program combining supervised exercise with counseling substantially reduced repeat offenses among former inmates in Denmark. A state legislator argues that adopting a similar program in this state would likewise reduce repeat offenses here.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the legislator's argument?
- This state's incarcerated population is substantially larger than Denmark's.
- Denmark spends considerably more per inmate on rehabilitation than this state does.
- The Danish program was popular with the Danish public.
- This state's reoffending factors match those targeted by the Danish program.
- The proposed state program omits counseling, the component that produced nearly all of Denmark's measured benefit.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?