Passage Comparison - LSAT Reading

Claims or assumptions both authors accept or rely on. Shared premises form the foundation for both passages' arguments.

Check whether key terms match, shift meaning, or are defined differently. Terms may appear similar but carry different meanings across passages.

Choosing a response that fits the topic but contradicts B’s stance or tone. B's actual perspective must guide the response, not general relevance.

Accepting the conclusion while challenging A’s support. B agrees with the outcome but questions the reasoning process.

Reframing A’s issue by changing the explanatory lens. B provides alternative conceptual tools to understand A's phenomenon.

Critiquing A’s proposal by predicting negative consequences. B challenges A's optimism by highlighting potential harms.

The type of support used: data, examples, theory, history, analogy, etc. Focus on evidence types rather than abstract theoretical approaches.

Tone is attitude; stance is the position taken on the issue. Tone reflects emotional coloring; stance is the substantive position.

Agreeing while narrowing A’s scope. B accepts the principle but restricts its application domain.

B addresses A’s claims by supporting, refining, challenging, or reframing. B engages with A's content rather than presenting independent views.

How broad or narrow the claim is (topic range, time, population, cases). Scope measures the breadth of application for claims.

They share a core claim but differ in scope, emphasis, or conditions. Partial overlap with boundaries or exceptions distinguishes it from full agreement.

Agreement level: same view, qualified agreement, or disagreement. Agreement level frames all other comparison dimensions.

The author’s main task (for example: explain, argue, critique, propose). Purpose is the author's primary action verb, not just the topic.

Identify each passage’s main point and overall purpose separately. Understand each passage independently before comparing them.

Uses absolute language such as “always,” “completely,” or “proves”. Extreme modifiers exceed what passages typically support.

Determine how Passage B relates to Passage A in view, purpose, and support. Focus on relationship dynamics rather than isolated content.

Reject unless the question asks for a specific detail-level comparison. Main point comparisons trump detail comparisons in most questions.

Find overlapping claims explicitly supported in both passages. Both passages must explicitly endorse the shared position.

Different purposes: exposition in A versus evaluation/argument in B. A informs neutrally while B takes a critical position.

Agreement on facts, disagreement on implications. Shared data foundation but divergent interpretive conclusions.

The author’s attitude toward the subject or other views. Tone reveals stance toward topic and opposing viewpoints.

How broad or narrow the claim’s coverage is. Scope determines the boundaries of what the claim covers.

Choosing a statement supported by only one passage. Both means both, not just one passage's view.

An option describing B’s function relative to A’s claim. Focus on how B engages with A's specific argument.

Whether each uses examples, studies, definitions, or causal reasoning. Different argumentative tools reveal different approaches.

Evidence supports; conclusion is the claim being supported. Evidence proves; conclusion is what's being proven.

Same subject matter, different purposes. Topic overlap doesn't mean purpose alignment.

B recommends action while A mainly explains or reports. Descriptive explains what is; prescriptive advocates what should be.