PrepTest 136 · Section 2 · Question 16 (Parallel Reasoning)

Step 1 · Pre-Question Guidance · read this first

Question type

Parallel Reasoning

The one idea it tests

Match the argument's skeleton: a decision is leaning one way because one benefit doesn't cover the cost, but an extra benefit tips the scale, so the decision should flip.

The basic logic

X-Ray the argument: (1) someone is leaning against an action, (2) because the obvious payoff seems too small for the cost, (3) but the action brings a second, separate payoff, (4) so they should do it. The right match has all four parts in the same order and the same strength.

Tiny words that decide it

“but”
“so”
“should”

Playground logic

Kevin doesn't want to rake Grandpa's leaves because the five dollars isn't worth the work. But raking also clears the yard for his dinosaur dig. So Kevin should rake. Patty, extra patty, top bun: a second reason flips the call.

Step 2 · The kid story

Kevin's Leaf Deal

Grandpa offered Kevin five dollars to rake the whole back yard. Kevin groaned. "Five dollars for that? That's not worth three hours of raking." He was leaning toward saying no. Priya sat on the porch step with her juice box. "Kevin, isn't the back yard where you want to dig for dinosaur bones?" Kevin froze. "Yes..." "And can you dig under a mountain of leaves?" "No..." "So raking gets you five dollars and a clear yard for your dig. The money alone may not cover it, but the dig does." Kevin grabbed the rake. "I should rake!" Lulu wrote on her clipboard: leaning no, payoff too small, but a second payoff, so yes. "That's the skeleton," she said. "Any argument with the same bones is a twin."

Step 3 · Try the model question

Kevin is leaning against raking because the five dollars wouldn't make up for the work. But raking would clear the yard for his dinosaur dig. So Kevin should rake the leaves.

Which one of the following shows reasoning most like Kevin's situation above?

Step 4 · The courtroom tale

The Case of the Bakery Oven

Bakery owner Rosa Delgado was sued by her business partner over a big oven. "Your Honor," said the partner's lawyer, "the extra bread the new oven bakes won't pay for the oven. So we lean against buying it." Mr. Whitfield rose, suspenders gleaming. "True, the bread alone doesn't cover the cost. But the new oven also heats the café next door, which the partners also own, so they can stay open in winter." Judge Kim nodded. "So the first payoff is too small, a second payoff makes up the gap, and the owners should buy the oven." "Same bones as any good deal, Your Honor." Ms. Delgado ordered the oven.

Step 5 · Work the real question

Open PrepTest 136, Section 2, Question 16 in your official copy from LSAC (for example in LawHub) and read it there.

Your answer

How to apply it

X-Ray the stimulus into numbered steps: the current leaning, the reason (one payoff too small for the cost), the extra payoff, and the recommendation. Write the skeleton with letters, not topics. Then X-Ray each choice the same way and compare bone by bone. A match needs the same current leaning, the same kind of extra payoff, and a 'should' conclusion. Ignore topic; similar subjects mean nothing.