How to Identify and Solve Most Strongly Supported Questions on the LSAT

Most Strongly Supported questions often appear as a series of factual statements or brief arguments without a clear conclusion. The correct response will reflect the idea most clearly indicated by those statements, even if it's not directly stated.

MSS questions are typically introduced with language like:

• “Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the statements above?”
• “Based on the information given, which of the following is most likely true?”
• “The information above provides the strongest support for which one of the following?”

Unlike other question types, MSS questions rarely ask you to fix a gap in reasoning. Instead, they test your ability to read closely and draw a logical connection based solely on what’s provided.

5 Sample LSAT Most Strongly Supported Questions With Answer Explanations

Here are five carefully selected MSS questions found in the logical reasoning section with full answer breakdowns to help you build familiarity and confidence with this question type.

Sample Question #1

“Modern science is built on the process of posing hypotheses and testing them against observations— in essence, attempting to show that the hypotheses are incorrect. Nothing brings more recognition than overthrowing conventional wisdom. It is accordingly unsurprising that some scientists are skeptical of the widely accepted predictions of global warming. What is instead remarkable is that with hundreds of researchers striving to make breakthroughs in climatology, very few find evidence that global warming is unlikely.”

The information above provides the most support for which one of the following statements?

(A) Most scientists who are reluctant to accept the global warming hypothesis are not acting in accordance with the accepted standards of scientific debate. 

(B) Most researchers in climatology have substantial motive to find evidence that would discredit the global warming hypothesis. 

(C) There is evidence that conclusively shows that the global warming hypothesis is true. 

(D) Scientists who are skeptical about global warming have not offered any alternative hypotheses to explain climatological data. (E) Research in global warming is primarily driven by a desire for recognition in the scientific community.

Answer:

A. The stimulus never mentioned an "accepted standard of scientific debate." This answer appears designed to evoke the idea of "scientific consensus," a term often linked to global warming discussions in the media, but it isn’t supported by the passage.

B. Correct. The argument implies that scientists value recognition, and since global warming predictions are widely accepted, challenging them would defy conventional wisdom. The stimulus asserts that overturning conventional wisdom brings significant recognition, so this answer fits perfectly.

C. The passage only notes that global warming predictions are widely accepted and have not been disproven, it doesn’t offer solid evidence that they are definitively true. Merely lacking disproof is not equivalent to irrefutable evidence.

D. This option is misleading. While the stimulus states that skeptical scientists lack opposing evidence, it doesn’t rule out alternative hypotheses, only that those hypotheses are unsupported by evidence. This answer overextends the claim.

E. The stimulus does not clarify what motivates research. It only indicates that researchers receive recognition for overturning the consensus. There’s no suggestion that aligning with conventional wisdom, as in global warming research, would garner comparable recognition.

Sample Question #2

“Editorialist: News media rarely cover local politics thoroughly, and local political business is usually conducted secretively. These factors each tend to isolate local politicians from their electorates. This has the effect of reducing the chance that any particular act of resident participation will elicit a positive official response, which in turn discourages resident participation in local politics.”

Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the editorialist’s statements?

(A) Particular acts of resident participation would be likely to elicit a positive response from local politicians if those politicians were less isolated from their electorate. 

(B) Local political business should be conducted less secretively because this would avoid discouraging resident participation in local politics. 

(C) The most important factor influencing a resident’s decision as to whether to participate in local politics is the chance that the participation will elicit a positive official response. 

(D) More-frequent thorough coverage of local politics would reduce at least one source of discouragement from resident participation in local politics. 

(E) If resident participation in local politics were not discouraged, this would cause local politicians to be less isolated from their electorate.

Answer:

A. This confuses less likely with unlikely. The argument only states that isolation makes politicians less likely to respond positively, not that positive responses are unlikely. A drop from 20% to 19% still qualifies as “less likely,” but not necessarily “unlikely.” It’s an important LSAT distinction: relative likelihood doesn’t equal absolute terms like “likely” or “unlikely.” That’s why this answer doesn’t hold up.

B. This strays into normative territory, or what should be true. But the stimulus deals strictly with descriptive facts about what is the case. The LSAT carefully separates normative claims from factual ones, so this answer is out of scope.

C. The stimulus notes that the likelihood of a positive reaction influences participation, but it doesn’t say it’s the only or most important factor. This choice assumes too much and goes beyond what the passage supports.

D. Correct. This properly follows the causal chain laid out in the stimulus. If there’s a lack of news and secretive politics, that leads to isolation of politicians, which in turn reduces the chance of a positive reaction, ultimately lowering resident participation. This choice logically ties those elements together.

E. This mistakenly tries to apply a contrapositive structure to language that isn’t strictly conditional. The stimulus uses terms like “tends to,” which imply general tendencies, not firm “if-then” rules. You can only apply contrapositives to true conditionals, not looser correlations.

Sample Question #3

“Fluoride enters a region’s groundwater when rain dissolves fluoride-bearing minerals in the soil. In a recent study, researchers found that when rainfall, concentrations of fluoride-bearing minerals, and other relevant variables are held constant, fluoride concentrations in groundwater are significantly higher in areas where the groundwater also contains a high concentration of sodium.”

Which one of the following can most reasonably be concluded on the basis of the researchers’ findings?

(A) Fluoride-bearing minerals are not the primary source of fluoride found in groundwater. 

(B) Rainfall does not affect fluoride concentrations in groundwater. 

(C) Sodium-bearing minerals dissolve at a faster rate than fluoride-bearing minerals. 

(D) Sodium in groundwater increases the rate at which fluoride-bearing minerals dissolve. 

(E) Soil that contains high concentrations of sodium-bearing minerals also contains high concentrations of fluoride-bearing minerals.

Answer:

A. There’s no support for this. The stimulus only identifies fluoride-bearing minerals as a source of fluoride in groundwater; it doesn’t mention any other sources. This claim goes beyond the provided information.

B. This appears to contradict the first sentence, which explicitly states that rainfall causes fluoride to enter groundwater. If fluoride enters without rainfall, it would undermine the initial premise.

C. This introduces a completely new term, sodium-bearing minerals, that’s never mentioned in the stimulus. It’s a trap designed to sound similar to fluoride-bearing minerals, but lacks any basis in the passage. It draws a misleading comparison.

D. Correct. This is well supported. The first sentence says fluoride enters groundwater through dissolution. Later, the passage notes that in soils with the same fluoride concentration, more fluoride enters groundwater when sodium levels are higher. That strongly suggests sodium enhances fluoride dissolution.

E. The fourth sentence clarifies that researchers controlled for fluoride concentration across soil samples. The difference in fluoride levels in the groundwater was due to sodium concentration, not the amount of fluoride in the soil. So this comparison is clearly addressed and explained.

Sample Question #4

“Worldwide, more books were sold last year than in any previous year. In particular, there were more cookbooks sold. For the first time ever, most of the cookbooks sold were not intended for beginners. Indeed, more cookbooks than ever were purchased by professional cooks. However, one of the few books available on every continent is a cookbook written for beginners, entitled Problem-Free Cooking.”

Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?

(A) Last year there were more cookbooks sold that were not intended for beginners than in any previous year. 

(B) The best-selling cookbook last year was a cookbook that was intended for beginners. 

(C) Sales of cookbooks intended for beginners were lower last year than in previous years. 

(D) Most of the cookbooks purchased last year that were not intended for beginners were purchased by professional cooks. 

(E) Problem-Free Cooking sold more copies last year than did any cookbook written for professional cooks.

Answer:

A. Correct. This is directly supported by the stimulus and completes the logical link.

B. This tries to make you think of Problem-Free Cooking, but we’re only told it’s available on all continents, not that it was a best seller. A book can have wide distribution without topping sales charts. So this claim lacks support.

C. This might be true, but it’s not necessarily true. While cookbook sales rose overall, that doesn't guarantee that both professional and non-professional categories increased in absolute numbers. The percentage of professional-targeted cookbooks could have grown even if total non-professional sales also rose.

D. We don’t know this. While more cooks bought books, we don’t have enough data about proportions. It’s entirely possible that advanced home cooks made up most purchases in the non-beginner category.

E. Again, availability doesn’t imply bestseller status. Just because a book is sold on every continent doesn’t mean it had the highest sales. This assumption isn't supported by the information provided.

Sample Question #5

“Stress is a common cause of high blood pressure. By calming their minds and thereby reducing stress, some people can lower their blood pressure. And most people can calm their minds, in turn, by engaging in exercise.”

Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the information above?

(A) For at least some people, having lower blood pressure has at least some tendency to cause their stress levels to be reduced. 

(B) Most people with high blood pressure can lower their blood pressure by reducing their stress levels. 

(C) Most people who do not exercise regularly have higher stress levels as a result. 

(D) Engaging in exercise can directly lower one’s blood pressure. 

(E) For at least some people, engaging in exercise can cause their stress levels to be reduced.

Answer:

A. This reverses the direction. The stimulus says lowering stress can lead to lower blood pressure, but that doesn’t mean reducing blood pressure necessarily lowers stress. That’s not a supported inference.

B. This goes beyond the text. The passage only says that some people can calm their minds through exercise, not most. Just because exercise helps most people feel calmer doesn't mean most people can use it to lower their blood pressure via stress reduction.

C. This overstates the evidence. The passage says some people can reduce blood pressure by calming their minds, which could be a very small number. So it's too strong to claim that lack of exercise increases blood pressure for everyone, based on that limited subset.

D. This is overly simplistic. The passage implies an indirect chain: exercise → calmer mind → lower stress → lower blood pressure. Saying exercise directly lowers blood pressure skips those intermediate steps, which the stimulus clearly lays out.

E. Correct. This is reasonably supported. The passage says some people can reduce their blood pressure by calming their minds. That means it's true for at least one person, which is exactly what this choice claims.

‍

All actual LSAT® content reproduced within this work is used with the permission of Law School Admission Council, Inc., (LSAC®) Box 40, Newtown, PA 18940, the copyright owner. LSAC does not review or endorse specific test-preparation materials, companies, or services, and inclusion of licensed LSAT Content within this work does not imply the review or endorsement of LSAC. LSAT (including variations) and LSAC are registered trademarks of LSAC.