Explain / Resolve

Master the art of resolving apparent paradoxes and explaining surprising results in LSAT Logical Reasoning.

LSAT Logical Reasoning

What Is an Explain/Resolve Question?

Explain/Resolve questions present you with a set of facts that seem contradictory or a result that seems surprising. Your task is to find the answer choice that makes both facts true at the same time without eliminating either one.

Recognizing the Question Stem

Certain keywords in the question stem signal an Explain/Resolve question. Watch for these phrases:

Explain

"Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain..."

Resolve

"Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy..."

Reconcile

"Which of the following, if true, most helps to reconcile the findings..."

The Anatomy of a Paradox

The Core Rule

A correct answer typically works by revealing a hidden mechanism, a relevant distinction, or an overlooked condition that bridges the two seemingly contradictory facts.

The Two-Sided Test

For every answer choice, ask yourself two questions:

1

Does it account for Fact A? Does this answer explain why the first observation occurs?

2

Does it account for Fact B? Does this answer also explain why the second, seemingly contradictory observation occurs?

Explain vs. Strengthen

Students often confuse Explain/Resolve questions with Strengthen questions. Here is the critical difference:

	Explain / Resolve	Strengthen
Stimulus contains	Two facts in tension	An argument with a conclusion
Your goal	Bridge both facts	Support the conclusion
Correct answer	New information resolving the tension	New evidence or assumption backing the argument
There is a conclusion?	No (just facts)	Yes (explicit or implicit)

How to Apply the Method

1

Read the stimulus carefully. Identify the two facts or observations that appear to be in conflict.

2

Articulate the paradox. In your own words, state: "It's strange that [Fact A] because [Fact B]."

3

Predict a bridge. Before reading the answers, think: "What kind of new information would make both facts make sense?"

4

Apply the Two-Sided Test. For each choice, ask: "Does this address both facts?"

5

Eliminate one-sided answers. Choices that only explain one fact, or that are irrelevant to either, are wrong.

Worked Example: Organic Farms

Step 1: Identify the paradox.

Fact A

Organic farms in the county use no synthetic pesticides.

Fact B

Their produce contains nearly the same levels of synthetic pesticides as conventional farms.

Organic Farms: Resolution

Step 3: Predict a bridge. We need something that explains how synthetic pesticides end up on organic produce even though the farms themselves don't apply them.

A

The organic farms are adjacent to conventional farms, and pesticide drift carries chemicals across property lines.

B

Organic farming is more labor-intensive than conventional farming.

C

Consumers prefer organic produce for health reasons.

D

Synthetic pesticides are more effective than natural alternatives.

Worked Example: City Traffic

Fact A

The highway was expanded with two additional lanes (more capacity).

Fact B

Average commute times increased by 12 minutes (worse performance).

City Traffic: Resolution

A

Highway construction projects often run over budget.

B

Public transit ridership in the city has remained steady.

C

The expansion attracted thousands of drivers who previously used alternative routes, increasing total volume beyond the new capacity.

D

Some residents opposed the expansion project.

Harder Example: Sleep Study

Fact A

Short sleepers report higher happiness.

Fact B

Short sleepers have elevated stress markers (physiologically worse off).

Common Mistakes

✕ One-Sided Answers

Choosing an answer that only explains Fact A or only explains Fact B, instead of bridging both.

✕ Denying a Fact

Selecting an answer that undermines or contradicts one of the stated facts. Both facts must remain true.

✕ Irrelevant Information

Being tempted by an answer that is interesting or true in general, but doesn't address the specific tension in the stimulus.

Strategy Summary

Step	Action	Key Question
1. Identify	Find the two conflicting facts	"What seems contradictory?"
2. Articulate	State the paradox clearly	"It's strange that A because B."
3. Predict	Hypothesize a bridge	"What new info would help?"
4. Test	Apply the Two-Sided Test	"Does it address both facts?"
5. Eliminate	Remove one-sided/irrelevant choices	"Does it only address one side?"

Question 1 of 5

A new study found that students who study with background music score lower on memory tests than students who study in silence. However, students who study with background music report feeling more confident about their performance on those same tests.

▼ Tap to read passage

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the finding described above?

(B) explains how music creates a false sense of confidence (addressing the higher self-reported confidence) while actually interfering with encoding (addressing the lower scores). It bridges both facts.

Question 2 of 5

A city installed bright LED streetlights on a residential street to improve safety. After one year, reported crime on that street decreased by 40%. However, the number of residents who said they felt unsafe walking at night increased by 15%.

▼ Tap to read passage

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?

(C) bridges both facts: crime genuinely dropped (Fact A), but the brighter lights revealed disorder that was always there, making residents feel less safe (Fact B). It explains both the objective improvement and the subjective decline.

Question 3 of 5

A company doubled its advertising budget for a new product launch. During the launch quarter, brand awareness increased by 60% according to surveys. Nevertheless, actual sales of the product fell 10% compared to projections.

▼ Tap to read passage

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the discrepancy between increased awareness and decreased sales?

(D) bridges both facts: the ads successfully raised awareness (explaining the 60% increase), but they also highlighted a price barrier that discouraged purchases (explaining the 10% sales drop). (A) is one-sided, and (B) addresses sales but not awareness.

Question 4 of 5

A national park banned all campfires in a heavily forested region to reduce the risk of wildfires. In the two years following the ban, the number of wildfires in that region increased by 25%.

▼ Tap to read passage

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent paradox?

(A) bridges both sides: the ban removed campfires (Fact A), but those campfires had been inadvertently reducing fuel buildup, so without them, more combustible material accumulated and caused more wildfires (Fact B). A classic unintended-consequence resolution.

Question 5 of 5

A hospital implemented a new hand-hygiene monitoring system that tracks whether staff wash their hands upon entering patient rooms. Compliance rates rose from 40% to 95%. However, hospital-acquired infection rates did not decrease during the same period.

▼ Tap to read passage

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why infection rates did not decrease despite improved hand hygiene?

(B) bridges both facts: hand hygiene truly improved (Fact A), but infections persisted because their primary source was equipment, not hands (Fact B). The improved hygiene was targeting the wrong vector. (C) is tempting but doesn't directly connect to hand hygiene improvement.