1. This LSAT main point question works like this:

	P1: Perkins advocates upper-middle-class.
	P2: Survey conducted at high-priced malls.
	Secondary Conclusion: Probable that Perkins's Supporters Overrepresented
	_______________________
	C: Results of poll are dubious.

Choice (C) paraphrases the conclusion and is the correct choice.

(A) is a guess as to what the author might conclude on the basis of the information presented,

(B) is a guess as to what Samuels's supporters believe, but there's nothing explicit or implicit to support about Samuels's supporters' views of this poll.

(D) Just because the poll results are dubious does not necessarily result in good chances for Samuels. It may very well be that the poll results are skewed as listed above, but Perkins still has 55 percent of the vote and is more likely to win.

(E) provides what seems to be good advice, but notice that the author does not take the extra step and provide advice for anyone; the author simply remarks that the results are dubious.

 

2. The argument works this way:

	P1: Deprived of REM, become irritable.
	_______________________
	C: REM relieves stress

Causality exists within the argument. The author assumes that the lack of REM sleep is the only possible cause for the irritability. One way to strengthen the argument would be to eliminate at least one competing cause for the irritability. Yet also notice that the premise states "irritable", whereas the conclusion states "stress". The author assumes that irritability is a sign of increased stress, and (E) helps connect the two and is the correct choice.

(A) weakens the argument by suggesting that another cause besides REM deprivation could cause irritability.

(B) refers to the content of dreams which is irrelevant. The argument is only concerned with whether people have dreams at all, not the type of dreams.

(C) weakens the argument by showing that reverse causality exists -- it's not that a lack of REM causes stress, instead stress causes the lack of REM.

(D) is similar to (B) in that it refers to the content of dreams, which is irrelevant.

 

3. This LSAT support inference question is much like a Reading Comprehension paragraph. Support exists for (D). Notice that two points exist for making a comparison. Oftentimes LSAT support questions have two points such as this. The first point is the 1989 ban, which was followed by a sharp increase in ivory identified as mammoth ivory. The second point was the news of the invention of an identification technique, which was followed by a dramatic decrease in ivory identified as mammoth ivory. Based on these two points, a comparison may be made, and apparently much of the ivory identified as mammoth ivory in between these two points, was not, in fact, mammoth ivory, and presumably elephant ivory.

(A) is not supported by the passage. We know that officials have a technique, but know nothing of its reliability.

(B) refers to "most" (greater than half), but nothing in the passage supports a "most" in reference to anything.

(C) is based on the assumption that elephant ivory supply and importation into the U.S. necessarily falls and drops with the population of African elephants. However, many other factors could affect the supply of ivory. Additionally, there's no mention or implication of actual living elephants, only of elephant ivory, which could have been stored in Africa for many years prior to importation.

(E) refers to total amount, but the passage only tells us that ivory identified as mammoth ivory increased. However, no information exists to support this. It could be that the total amount of all ivory vastly decreased or remained constant, yet that identified as mammoth ivory sharply increased.