easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Mara: Our office's productivity climbed last quarter because of the new free-coffee program. With caffeine freely available, everyone stayed more alert through the afternoon. Tev: Productivity did climb, but the coffee had nothing to do with it. We also reorganized the teams that quarter, and that restructuring is what drove the gains.
Which one of the following, if true, most weakens Mara's explanation of the productivity increase?
- The reorganization changed no employee's salary.
- Employees consumed no more coffee after the free-coffee program began than they had consumed when purchasing coffee themselves.
- The office's productivity had remained stable during the preceding quarter, with no comparable change recorded during the prior reporting period.
- Free coffee costs the office less than the team reorganization did.
- Several employees report preferring tea to coffee.
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?