hard · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Corporate trainer: Employees who complete the advanced negotiation seminar close, on average, twenty percent more deals than employees who do not. Since Priya completed the advanced negotiation seminar last spring, her deal-closing rate must now be at least twenty percent higher than it was before she took the seminar.
Which one of the following is an assumption required by the trainer's argument?
- Priya was already one of the top-performing negotiators at her company before completing the seminar.
- The advanced negotiation seminar covers substantially different material than the introductory seminar does.
- Priya's manager assigned her to complete the seminar because her closing rate had been declining.
- Priya's own prior closing rate is comparable to the average rate of employees who never took the seminar.
- Every employee who completes the seminar improves by exactly the same twenty percent, with no variation.
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?