Top 200 Vocabulary Word List for the LSAT | Must Know Words for Common Examination Instructions

The 200-word examination instruction list

LSAT instructions specify what relationship to find between the evidence and the answer. Must be true asks for a result that follows in every allowed case. Could be true needs only one compatible case. A question about an argument’s flaw asks for its unsupported move, while Argumentative Writing asks you to develop a position.

The bank includes question instructions, answer-format phrases and vocabulary for reading the task. Check the official directions for the exact question and examination sitting.

Exam requirements · Worked examples · Fencing Method

LSAT reasoning tasks and question stems

No.	Instruction or term	What it asks you to do
1	Logical Reasoning	Evaluate a short argument or set of statements using the task in the stem.
2	Reading Comprehension	Use the passage or paired passages to answer about ideas, structure and viewpoints.
3	Argumentative Writing	Develop a reasoned position on the issue and respond to other perspectives as the directions require.
4	Unscored variable section	A section included for test development that does not contribute to the scored result.
5	Most strongly supported	Choose what follows with the best textual or logical support.
6	Must be true	Choose a statement that holds in every case consistent with the supplied facts.
7	Could be true	Choose a statement compatible with at least one permitted case.
8	Except	Find the choice that fails the stated rule while the others fit it.
9	Necessary assumption	Identify a premise the argument needs to reach its conclusion.
10	Sufficient assumption	Identify a statement that makes the conclusion follow when added to the premises.
11	Negate an assumption	Reverse the proposed condition to test whether the argument depends on it.
12	Principle application	Check which rule justifies the stated reasoning or which case follows the rule.
13	Parallel reasoning	Choose the argument with the same underlying pattern.
14	Parallel flaw	Choose an argument that makes the same reasoning error.
15	Method of reasoning	Identify how the author moves from premises to conclusion.
16	Role of a statement	Determine whether the named sentence is evidence, a conclusion, a concession or another element.
17	Point at issue	Identify the precise proposition on which the speakers disagree.
18	Resolve the apparent discrepancy	Choose information that explains how the two reported facts can both be true.
19	Flaw	Identify the unsupported move in the reasoning.
20	Strengthen the argument	Choose a fact that makes the conclusion better supported.
21	Weaken the argument	Choose a fact that makes the conclusion less well supported.
22	Evaluate the argument	Identify information that would help decide whether the reasoning is persuasive.

Conditional reasoning, passages and writing

No.	Instruction or term	What it asks you to do
23	Necessary condition	Recognise something that must hold when another condition holds.
24	Sufficient condition	Recognise a condition whose presence guarantees the stated result.
25	Conditional statement	Read the if condition and the outcome it guarantees in the given rule.
26	Contrapositive	Reverse and negate both parts of a conditional statement to express its equivalent.
27	Converse	Switch the condition and outcome and check whether that new claim is independently supported.
28	Inverse	Negate both sides without switching them and check whether the new claim follows.
29	Unless	Translate the exception so that the condition outside it becomes clear.
30	Only if	Identify the condition that must hold for the other condition to hold.
31	Either or	Check whether the context allows both possibilities before applying the choice.
32	Counterexample	Find a permitted case in which the proposed general conclusion fails.
33	Unrepresentative sample	Identify how the selected cases may differ from the group about which the author generalises.
34	Confuses cause and effect	Check whether the argument may have reversed what produces what.
35	Ad hominem	Recognise criticism of a person that does not address the argument.
36	Equivocation	Identify a shift in meaning between uses of the same word.
37	Circular reasoning	Recognise when the reason effectively assumes the conclusion.
38	Comparative Reading	Track each passage’s position before answering across both.
39	Line reference	Use the indicated part of the passage and enough context to interpret it.
40	Author’s attitude	Infer the writer’s stance from wording, emphasis and qualification.
41	Perspective supplied	Use the position in the writing materials to develop or test your own reasoning.
42	Prewriting	Use the planning period to identify the issue, possible positions and evidence.
43	Scored multiple choice	Use the official format to identify which types count towards the reported LSAT score.
44	Quantifier scope	Check exactly which people, cases or claims are covered by all, some or none.
45	At least one	Identify the minimum claim that one or more cases exist.
46	Not all	Recognise that at least one case is outside the claimed group.
47	Mutually exclusive cases	Check whether the two outcomes can both occur under the rule.
48	Jointly exhaustive	Check whether the listed possibilities cover every permitted case.
49	Inference from silence	Identify a conclusion drawn only because the passage leaves a matter unstated.
50	Comparison group	Ask which group would provide a fair test of the claimed difference.
51	Selection bias	Check whether the selection method distorts the group used as evidence.
52	Alternative cause	Identify another event that could produce the observed result.
53	Causal chain	Track the sequence of proposed causes and check which links have support.
54	False dilemma	Identify an argument that treats two possibilities as exhaustive without establishing that.
55	Straw man	Identify a response that attacks a weaker or different version of the stated position.
56	Normative claim	Recognise a claim about what ought to happen.
57	Descriptive claim	Recognise a claim about what happens or has happened.
58	Underlying principle	State the general rule connecting the argument’s evidence and conclusion.
59	Analogous case	Find a comparable case that preserves the relevant relationship.
60	Main conclusion	Identify the claim that the rest of the reasoning ultimately supports.
61	Intermediate conclusion	Identify a claim that receives support and then helps support a further claim.
62	Support gap	Find the step that is assumed between the premises and conclusion.
63	Degree of certainty	Distinguish proof, likelihood and possibility in the wording of a conclusion.
64	Part-to-whole error	Check whether the argument wrongly attributes a part’s property to the whole.
65	Embedded pretesting	From August 2027, expect unscored items within sections rather than in a separate section.

Arguments, evidence and relationships

No.	Instruction or term	What it asks you to do
66	Complete the argument	Choose the conclusion or missing proposition that follows from the stated reasoning.
67	Sufficient information	Decide whether the facts supplied establish one required conclusion.
68	Consider both positions	Check what each speaker claims about the same proposition.
69	Countercase	Find a permitted example that changes or disproves the claimed result.
70	Position on an issue	State what you think about the exact claim in the prompt.
71	Consider a challenge	Address a serious objection or case that might weaken your position.
72	Reason and example	Show how the example demonstrates the point made by the reason.
73	Question stem	Read the wording that identifies the relationship between the evidence and the required choice.
74	Reasoning flaw	Locate the exact step where the evidence fails to support the conclusion.
75	Alternative explanation	Consider a different reason that could account for the same observation.
76	Author’s assumption	Identify a premise the argument relies on without stating directly.
77	Strength of support	Judge how directly a detail bears on the exact claim.
78	Most logically completes	Choose the ending that follows from the text or notes.
79	Most precisely	Choose the wording whose meaning fits the context most closely.
80	Main purpose	Identify what the text as a whole is trying to accomplish.
81	Best describes	Choose the description that most accurately fits the stated target.
82	Best illustrates	Choose the example or quotation that most directly shows the idea.
83	Most directly supports	Pick the evidence with the clearest connection to the named claim.
84	If true	Assume the answer choice is true while judging its effect on the claim.
85	Function of a sentence	Identify how the sentence develops, limits or supports the passage’s argument.
86	Overall structure	Track how the text’s main parts are organised.
87	Author’s claim	Find what the named author argues or asserts.
88	Point of agreement	Find what both sources would endorse based on the evidence.
89	Introduce	Choose wording that supplies the context needed for the stated audience.
90	Generalise	State a broader point only to the extent that the examples support it.
91	Transitions	Identify the relationship between ideas before choosing a connecting expression.
92	Continuation	Choose a link that adds a point in the same direction.
93	Concession	Acknowledge a point before shifting to the principal claim.
94	Cause and effect	Choose a link that shows one event producing or explaining the other.
95	Quantifier	Watch for words such as all, some or none that alter a claim’s scope.
96	Textual evidence	Choose a detail from the source that supports the precise claim.
97	Scope	Check the population, time frame or range covered by the claim.
98	Strengthen	Identify information that makes the conclusion better supported.
99	Logical relationship	Identify whether adjacent ideas add, contrast, explain or exemplify.
100	Sample size	Check how many observations or individuals contribute to the result.
101	Primary source	Use evidence created in or directly connected to the period or events under study.
102	Secondary source	Use an analysis or interpretation produced after or about the events.
103	Author’s reservation	Identify a stated hesitation, exception or limit on the main claim.
104	Point of view	Identify the standpoint influencing how the source presents events.
105	Scope of the claim	Match the answer to the people, period or cases the passage actually discusses.
106	Summarise	Select the central points and leave out minor details.
107	Compare	Set the items side by side on the same relevant feature.
108	Contrast	Show how the items differ on a shared point of comparison.
109	Analyse	Break down the evidence and explain how its parts relate.
110	Interpret	Say what a statement, result or display means in context.
111	Infer	Use clues to reach a conclusion the material implies.
112	Suggest	Offer a plausible answer suited to the information given.
113	Evaluate	Weigh relevant evidence or criteria before reaching a judgment.
114	Distinguish	Give the feature that lets the reader tell two things apart.
115	Support	Supply evidence that helps establish the claim.
116	Most likely	Choose the conclusion with the strongest support among the options.
117	Best supported	Prefer the conclusion backed most directly by the evidence.
118	Relevant	Connected to the specific question or criterion.
119	Specific	Precise enough to identify a particular fact or example.
120	Explicit	Stated directly in the source.
121	Implicit	Suggested by the source and recoverable from clues.
122	Evidence	A fact, detail or observation that supports a claim.
123	Claim	An assertion that can be tested against evidence or reasoning.
124	Reason	The basis for a statement, choice or result.
125	Conclusion	The result reached after considering the reasoning or evidence.
126	Assumption	A premise taken as given for the purpose of the question.
127	Context	The surrounding information that helps determine meaning.
128	Generalisation from a sample	Check whether evidence from a group can support the wider claim.
129	Support the claim	Give evidence that bears on the exact claim in the question.
130	Specific passage detail	Use a concrete detail that directly supports the proposed interpretation.
131	Contradict	Show where two claims or pieces of evidence are incompatible.
132	Qualification	Limit or refine a claim where the evidence supports a more precise position.
133	Counterargument	Present and address a plausible competing interpretation.
134	Support an argument	Connect the example or document to a reason for accepting the claim.
135	Validity	Consider whether the evidence or method answers the intended question.
136	Strengths	Explain features that make the evidence or method fit the purpose.
137	Correlation	Describe how variables vary together within the data.
138	Confounding factor	Identify a factor that could contribute to the apparent relationship.
139	Representative sample	Check whether the selected cases reflect the population of interest.
140	Deductive reasoning	Show how a conclusion follows from premises or prior results.
141	Counterclaim	Present a plausible position that challenges the claim.
142	Purpose	Identify why a text, study or source was produced.
143	Perspective	Explain the viewpoint from which a claim or event is presented.
144	Synthesis	Combine related evidence into one coherent understanding.
145	Compare both	Keep each named text, case or object visible across the same comparison points.
146	Classify	Assign each item to a category using the stated rule.
147	Role of the named passage detail	Decide whether the part illustrates, supports or limits a claim.
148	Text 1	Keep the first text’s position separate when comparing sources.
149	Text 2	Identify the second text’s response to the precise claim being compared.
150	Overlap between claims	Identify what both positions assert before considering where they disagree.
151	Unqualified claim	Recognise a claim stated without a relevant exception or limiting condition.
152	Compare and contrast	Address similarities and differences for the named items.
153	Deduce	Use the information given to reach a logically supported result.
154	Explicit reference	Name the particular feature of the source on which a point depends.

Core instructions and evidence

No.	Instruction or term	What it asks you to do
155	Recognise	Find a familiar feature in a new example.
156	Identify	Name or pick out the item the question specifies.
157	Select	Choose only the number of options requested.
158	Choose	Commit to the option that fits the stated criteria.
159	Match	Pair each item with the option that corresponds to it.
160	Complete	Fill in what is missing while keeping the supplied structure.
161	Label	Attach the correct name to the indicated part.
162	Locate	Find the specified detail, point or region.
163	Indicate	Make the chosen feature or answer clear.
164	Record	Write the result in the space and form provided.
165	Answer	Respond directly to the question being asked.
166	Give	Supply the requested fact, example or result.
167	State	Express the required point directly and clearly.
168	Name	Supply the correct term, person or item.
169	List	Set out the requested items separately.
170	Define	Give the precise meaning used in the subject or question.
171	Describe	Report the relevant characteristics, events or pattern.
172	Outline	Give the main steps or points in brief.
173	Explain	Connect the result to its cause, mechanism or reasoning.
174	Justify	Give evidence or reasoning that supports your answer.
175	Assess	Judge the extent, value or strength of something using evidence.
176	Discuss	Develop a structured response that considers the relevant issues.
177	Illustrate	Make an idea clear with a relevant example or diagram.
178	Demonstrate	Show how a fact, process or result can be established.
179	Determine	Work from the given information to establish an answer.
180	Check	Test the answer against the original instruction or condition.
181	Correct	Repair the specific error while preserving the intended meaning or result.
182	Revise	Change a response so it better meets the task.
183	Arrange	Put items into the order or grouping requested.
184	Sequence	Put stages into a meaningful order.
185	Group	Put items with a shared feature together.
186	Order	Sort items by the criterion given in the prompt.
187	Insert	Place the requested word, symbol or number at the indicated point.
188	Replace	Swap the specified part for a suitable alternative.
189	Omit	Leave out the indicated item or detail.
190	Include	Make sure the requested part appears in the response.
191	Exclude	Keep the named item or category outside your answer.
192	Underline	Draw a line under the exact word or phrase requested where instructed.
193	Refer to	Use the specified passage, figure or notes when responding.
194	Based on	Ground the answer in the material named in the question.
195	According to	Use what the specified source says.
196	In context	Use the meaning that fits this passage or situation.
197	Example	A particular case used to make a general idea clear.
198	Condition	A requirement that must be satisfied.
199	Constraint	A restriction that shapes the possible answers.
200	Criterion	A standard used to choose or judge an answer.

What the examination requires

Use the format for your test date

Before August 2027, LSAC describes four 35-minute multiple-choice sections, comprising two scored Logical Reasoning sections, one scored Reading Comprehension section and one unscored variable section. Beginning August 2027, LSAC says unscored questions will be embedded within three sections. Its announced standard schedule starts with 52 minutes of Reading Comprehension, then two 45-minute Logical Reasoning sections, with a 10-minute break between sections.

Testing location and writing arrangements are separate

Starting with August 2026, LSAC moved the multiple-choice test towards test-centre delivery for almost all candidates, with limited exceptions. Argumentative Writing is administered separately and remotely. Under standard conditions LSAC allows 15 minutes for prewriting analysis and 35 minutes to write. Check which appointment and writing requirements apply to you.

Logical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension use different source material

In Logical Reasoning, identify the facts, premises and conclusion, then follow the stem. In Reading Comprehension, locate the relevant portion of a passage or track positions across both passages. Keep the author’s claims separate from the viewpoints they report.

Treat the writing sample as a distinct task

LSAC describes Argumentative Writing as an unscored sample. Read the issue and perspectives, then develop a defensible position with reasoning. LSAC says an approved writing sample on file is required before it releases your LSAT score. Check the current instructions if you already have a sample on file.

• Find the exact action before deciding on your answer.
• Check which passage, data, lines or choices the action applies to.
• Use the requested form and confirm any limits before moving on.

Worked examples of common examination instructions

These original examples use short passages and tasks so you can see what each instruction adds to the work.

Necessary and sufficient conditions do different work

Suppose a notice says ‘A member can enter the archive only if they show a pass.’ Showing a pass is necessary under that rule. It may not be sufficient because the notice leaves open other requirements. A person who enters must show a pass, but a person who shows one is not guaranteed entry by this rule.

Find the precise point at issue

Mira says the town should extend Saturday bus hours because current services stop before evening shifts end. Imani says the existing hours should remain, because she would use the budget to add Sunday service. The disagreement is about whether to extend Saturday hours. The exchange does not establish that they disagree about when shifts end.

Weaken a causal inference

An original argument says a new sign increased library visits because visits rose the month it was installed. Evidence that a nearby branch closed that month would weaken the inference by supplying another plausible reason. It does not need to prove that the sign had no effect.

Read the role of a detail in a passage

An author acknowledges that digital archives are cheap to distribute before arguing that fragile paper originals still need protection. The cost point is a concession. It acknowledges an advantage before the author develops the case for preservation.

Use the supplied perspectives in writing

A practice issue concerns whether city parks should close at sunset. One perspective stresses maintenance costs and another stresses evening access for workers. A position supporting later hours in selected parks could explain how transport access and lighting help decide where the policy is workable. Engage with both concerns through your own reasoning.

Use the Fencing Method to practise instruction words

Start with one accurate sentence, then add a specific detail. Add the reason, comparison or condition only when the instruction needs it. Transfer the same action to a new task. For selected-response questions, this is a short practice check to clarify what a good choice must do.

1. A pass is required.
2. A member must show a pass to enter.
3. Showing a pass is necessary for entry under the stated rule, but the rule leaves other requirements open.
4. Use a new rule with only if. Identify what is required and test whether the reverse claim is supported.

Read the eduKate Fencing Method for Vocabulary.

Practise and check your answers

Mark the sentence doing the work

For Logical Reasoning, identify the conclusion and the main support. Write the action required by the stem, such as weaken or infer. Review each wrong option against that action. A plausible fact can still fail if it addresses a neighbouring conclusion.

Move from one passage to two

Write a short statement of each author’s position. Then identify what both discuss and what each actually claims about it. Keep an eye on qualifications. If a question asks whether they agree, find positive evidence of the shared proposition in both passages.

Practice 1. Some volunteers have cars. Must all volunteers have cars?

No. Some guarantees at least one but does not establish that everyone does.

Practice 2. A conclusion uses a survey of one morning class to describe all students. What is a possible flaw?

The sampled class may not represent all students. Identify what could make the two groups differ.

Practice 3. What should a parallel reasoning answer preserve?

Preserve the relation between the premises and conclusion. The topic can change.

Practice 4. A passage reports an argument before rejecting it. Whose view should you attribute the argument to?

Attribute it to the person or group the author reports, unless the author expressly adopts it.

Frequently asked questions

Are the 2027 changes already part of a 2026 sitting?

Use LSAC’s requirements for your sitting. LSAC announced the change for the August 2027 administration onward.

Do I need legal knowledge for the practice in this guide?

The examples concern ordinary arguments, text and conditions. Read the supplied evidence and follow the stem.

Is the writing sample included in the numerical LSAT score?

LSAC calls it unscored and administers it separately. Follow its writing-sample rules for score release.

Official sources and next reading

• LSAC types of questions
• LSAC LSAT and Argumentative Writing specifications
• LSAC August 2027 format changes
• LSAC Argumentative Writing FAQs

Related guide in this series · GRE General Test instructions

Read eduKateSG’s 200-word vocabulary guide for more ways to group and practise vocabulary.

Back to the 200-word list · Back to contents