This blog is a part of the “Approach Question Type” series and like all articles in this series will focus on step 4 of the “Analyze Stimulus” step. If you need a refresher on how to approach LR questions generally, make sure to check up on our blog "How to Approach the Logical Reasoning Section.”
Table of Contents:
A MSS question asks you to determine which of the provided answer choices is most strongly supported by the information given in the stimulus.
One structurally unique aspect of MSS questions on the LSAT is that they do not require you to identify a conclusion within the passage itself. This sets them apart from other types of logical reasoning questions, such as those asking you to strengthen or weaken an argument or identify assumptions, which all are dependent on first identifying an argument's conclusion.
Structure
There is no conclusion in the stimulus
This fact is incredibly fundamental and unique to MSS. In (most) LR questions where you need to identify a conclusion, the argument is structured with premises leading to a conclusion, and your job is to find or evaluate this conclusion. In contrast, MSS questions give you a passage that lacks this clear argumentative structure, emphasizing the need to synthesize and infer from the provided information. In reality, the MSS stimulus doesn’t have an argument, because there is no conclusion; the MSS stimulus is just a set of premises.
Question stem Examples
Focus on Information and Relevancy:
MSS questions present a set of premises or factual information without necessarily leading to a specific conclusion. You must be comfortable accepting everything in the passage at premise value. Your task is to then make an inference based on this information, identifying the answer choice that is most strongly supported by the premises. Without a clear conclusion, MSS questions require you to rely on the evidence presented. It is important to try and avoid bringing outside information or assumptions into the already stated premises. You need to carefully read and understand the passage, considering how the different pieces of information support one of the answer choices in the most logical way.
Be Cautious of “Severe” Language:
See the following example:
Argument: “eating fruits is always a healthy option
Vs.
Argument: “eating fruits is generally a healthy option
What’s easier to argue for? A situation that always happens, or a situation that generally happens? The former takes one example to disprove; my opponent simply needs to find one situation where it isn’t healthy to completely dismantle my conclusion. The latter “generally” would require you to peruse through a lot more data. LSAT questions are designed to test logical reasoning, and extreme conclusions can be easily weakened by presenting exceptions or counterexamples. The switch away from strong language, to more “general” language might colloquially be called this “political” speak (I mean, there is a reason politicians and lawyers debate the way that they do).
The more specific, more certain, and more severe of a promise we make with our conclusions, the easier it is to be broken down. It is a risk to make certain promises, and that’s why in the world of the LSAT we like to be skeptical and leave open space. So when the irate mother yells at their kid for failing to provide more help with chores and “never washing the dishes,” we might expect the kid to provide one counterexample to completely disregard the argument!
Prediction
One way to drill MSS questions is to attempt to make a prediction based on the stimulus in what the conclusion might be. Before looking at the answer choices, think about what kind of statement would be a reasonable inference based on the stimulus. This prediction can be general, just to guide your thinking and get your radars on.
However, you can also be more specific and write down your predictions in a methodical way, which might be helpful especially if you are struggling with MSS questions. When you go through the MSS stimulus, you can ask yourself, with each fact/premise/statement, what purpose about support might it provide? Then, you can make an inference based on the relationship between the premise statements and your conclusion prediction, which may help guide you when you pass through the answer choices.
Stimulus: Recent studies suggest that students who participate in extracurricular activities tend to perform better academically than those who do not. These activities help students develop time management skills, which are beneficial for academic success.
Question: Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?
Answer Choices:
A) All students who participate in extracurricular activities perform better academically than those who do not.
B) Time management skills are the only factor influencing academic success.
C) Participation in extracurricular activities can contribute to better academic performance.
D) Students who do not develop time management skills will not perform well academically.
E) Extracurricular activities are most important for academic success.
Correct Answer: C) Participation in extracurricular activities can contribute to better academic performance.
Explanation: This answer choice is the most strongly supported by the stimulus, which indicates a potential (can) positive correlation between participation in extracurricular activities and academic performance due to the development of time management skills.
Did you notice the severe language used in answer choices A, B, D, and E? Notice the language used in the stimulus is less aggressive, whereas the wrong answer choices use more aggressive, ultimatums, words like “all”, “only”, “will not”, “most”.
Although there generally will only be a few MSS questions in the LR section, the skills used in MSS are synonymous with MC questions in that you have to be comfortable deciphering how premises relate to an argument’s conclusion. These foundational skills will set you up for success in identifying conclusions in argument-based LR questions (which many q-types are).
