Match Principles: Master LSAT Principle Application Questions
Learn proven strategies to apply general principles to specific situations, identify conforming scenarios, and ace match principles questions on the LSAT Logical Reasoning section with official examples and expert techniques.
Match principles questions, also called conform to principle questions or principle application questions, are a specialized question type in the LSAT Logical Reasoning section that test your ability to determine whether specific situations conform to or illustrate general rules. Unlike principle identification questions where you find the general rule underlying a specific argument, match principles questions give you the general rule and ask you to identify which specific situation follows that rule.
The Law School Admission Council (LSAC) includes match principles questions to assess a fundamental legal skill: applying abstract legal rules, statutes, or precedents to concrete factual scenarios. This mirrors the daily work of legal professionals who must determine whether specific cases fall under general legal principles—the essence of legal application and case analysis.
What Are Match Principles Questions
Match principles questions present a general principle, rule, or guideline in the stimulus and then ask you to identify which answer choice describes a situation that conforms to (or sometimes violates) that principle. The key challenge is determining whether the specific details of each situation satisfy all requirements of the general rule.
📌 Common Question Stems
Conforming to Principle (Most Common):
- "Which one of the following judgments most closely conforms to the principle stated above?"
- "Which of the following situations best illustrates the principle described above?"
- "The principle above, if valid, most strongly supports which of the following judgments?"
- "Which one of the following situations conforms most closely to the principle illustrated above?"
Violating the Principle (Less Common):
- "Which one of the following violates the principle stated above?"
- "Which situation fails to conform to the principle described above?"
The Direction of Reasoning
Understanding the logical direction is crucial for match principles questions:
Logical Direction: General to Specific
Stimulus: General principle or abstract rule
↓ Apply to ↓
Answer Choices: Specific situations or concrete scenarios
Task: Find which specific situation satisfies all conditions of the general principle
This direction is the reverse of principle identification questions, where you start with a specific argument and find the general principle underlying it. In match principles questions, you work from abstract to concrete.
General Principle → Specific Application
The correct answer must satisfy every requirement stated in the principle
Official LSAC-Style Example Analysis
Let's examine an LSAT-style match principles question to understand the application process:
📚 Match Principles Example
Principle: A company should be held responsible for environmental damage if and only if the damage was both foreseeable and avoidable through reasonable precautions that the company failed to take.
Which one of the following judgments most closely conforms to the principle stated above?
- NewChem Corporation should not be held responsible for groundwater contamination because, although the contamination was foreseeable, no reasonable precautions could have prevented it.
- BioTech Industries should be held responsible for the decline in local fish populations because the decline could have been prevented with reasonable precautions.
- CleanPower LLC should be held responsible for air quality degradation because the degradation was foreseeable and could have been prevented if the company had installed available pollution-control technology.
- EcoManufacturing should not be held responsible for soil contamination because, although the company failed to take reasonable precautions, the contamination was not foreseeable.
- GreenCorp should be held responsible for habitat destruction because the destruction was extremely harmful to endangered species.
Step-by-Step Analysis
Step 1: Break Down the Principle into Conditions
Principle Requirements
A company should be held responsible IF AND ONLY IF:
- Condition 1: The damage was foreseeable ∧
- Condition 2: The damage was avoidable through reasonable precautions ∧
- Condition 3: The company failed to take those reasonable precautions
Logical Form: Responsible ↔ (Foreseeable ∧ Avoidable ∧ Failed to Act)
Key Phrase: "if and only if" means this is both necessary AND sufficient—all three conditions must be met for responsibility, and if all three are met, responsibility follows.
Step 2: Evaluate Each Answer Choice
(A) NewChem Corporation - Should NOT be held responsible
- Foreseeable? ✓ Yes (stated)
- Avoidable through reasonable precautions? ✗ No ("no reasonable precautions could have prevented it")
- Failed to take reasonable precautions? N/A (none existed)
Result: Not all conditions met → Correctly says "should NOT be responsible" ✓ Conforms to principle
(B) BioTech Industries - Should be held responsible
- Foreseeable? Unknown (not stated)
- Avoidable through reasonable precautions? ✓ Yes (stated)
- Failed to take reasonable precautions? ✓ Implied
Result: Missing information about foreseeability → Cannot confirm all conditions met ✗
(C) CleanPower LLC - Should be held responsible
- Foreseeable? ✓ Yes (stated)
- Avoidable through reasonable precautions? ✓ Yes ("available pollution-control technology")
- Failed to take reasonable precautions? ✓ Yes (implied by "if the company had installed")
Result: All conditions met → Correctly says "should be responsible" ✓ Conforms to principle
(D) EcoManufacturing - Should NOT be held responsible
- Foreseeable? ✗ No (stated: "not foreseeable")
- Avoidable through reasonable precautions? Unknown
- Failed to take reasonable precautions? ✓ Yes (stated)
Result: Not all conditions met → Correctly says "should NOT be responsible" ✓ Conforms to principle
(E) GreenCorp - Should be held responsible
- Foreseeable? Unknown (not stated)
- Avoidable through reasonable precautions? Unknown
- Failed to take reasonable precautions? Unknown
- Reasoning given: "extremely harmful to endangered species"
Result: Bases responsibility on harm severity, not on the principle's conditions ✗
✓ Multiple Correct Answers?
In this analysis, options (A), (C), and (D) all technically conform to the principle. However, LSAC designs questions so only one answer most closely conforms. Here's why (C) is best:
- (C) Affirmatively applies the principle: All conditions are met → responsibility follows
- (A) & (D) Apply it negatively: Conditions not met → no responsibility
- Question stem says "most closely conforms": Positive application typically conforms more closely than negative
In practice, review all answers carefully and compare the degree of conformity when multiple seem possible.
Strategy for Match Principles Questions
Success requires systematic analysis of the principle and methodical testing of each situation:
Identify All Conditions in the Principle
Break the principle into its component requirements. Look for multiple conditions joined by "and," "or," "if," "only if," "unless," etc. Create a checklist of what must be true for the principle to apply.
Note the Logical Connectors
Pay careful attention to: "if and only if" (necessary and sufficient), "only if" (necessary condition), "if" (sufficient condition), "unless" (negation), "and" (all required), "or" (at least one required).
Identify Quantifiers and Scope
Note words like "all," "some," "most," "any," "every," "no." These define the principle's scope and determine which situations it covers.
Test Each Answer Against All Conditions
For each situation, systematically check whether it satisfies every requirement of the principle. Use your checklist. A situation that fails any requirement doesn't conform (unless the question asks for violations).
Watch for Missing Information
Eliminate answers where crucial information is unstated or unclear. If you can't determine whether a condition is met because the information isn't provided, that answer likely doesn't conform to the principle.
Verify the Conclusion Matches
If all conditions are met, the principle's conclusion should follow. If conditions aren't met, the conclusion shouldn't follow. The situation's outcome must align with what the principle requires.
⚠️ The "Close Enough" Trap
Wrong answers often satisfy most but not all conditions. Test makers know students look for approximate matches. A situation must satisfy every requirement of the principle to conform. Missing even one condition means it doesn't conform, no matter how similar it seems otherwise. Be precise in your analysis.
Mastering Conditional Logic in Principles
Most match principles questions involve conditional logic. Understanding these structures is essential for correct application:
Key Conditional Structures
| Conditional Form | Logical Meaning | Symbolic Form |
|---|---|---|
| If A, then B | A is sufficient for B; B is necessary for A | A → B |
| A only if B | B is necessary for A; A cannot occur without B | A → B |
| A if and only if B | A and B always occur together (biconditional) | A ↔ B |
| A unless B | If not B, then A; B prevents A | ¬B → A |
| All A are B | If something is A, it must be B | A → B |
| Only A are B | If something is B, it must be A | B → A |
| No A are B | If something is A, it cannot be B | A → ¬B |
The "If and Only If" Structure
This biconditional structure appears frequently in LSAT principles and requires special attention:
Understanding "If and Only If"
Statement: "X should occur if and only if Y is true"
This means BOTH:
- If Y, then X: Y is sufficient for X (when Y is true, X must occur)
- If X, then Y: Y is necessary for X (X cannot occur without Y)
Symbolic Form: X ↔ Y (X and Y always occur together)
Application: A situation conforms if X occurs when Y is true, or X doesn't occur when Y is false. Both directions must be satisfied.
Compound Conditions
Principles often combine multiple conditions with "and" or "or":
Conjunction (AND)
Example: "Action X is justified if A is true and B is true and C is true"
Logical Form: (A ∧ B ∧ C) → X
Requirement: ALL conditions must be met for X to be justified
Conforming situation: Shows A, B, and C all present, leading to X
Disjunction (OR)
Example: "Action X is justified if A is true or B is true"
Logical Form: (A ∨ B) → X
Requirement: AT LEAST ONE condition must be met for X to be justified
Conforming situation: Shows either A or B (or both) present, leading to X
Conforms = All Conditions Met + Correct Conclusion
Common Wrong Answer Patterns
Match principles questions include predictable traps. Recognizing these accelerates elimination:
1. Missing One Condition
The situation satisfies most requirements but fails to meet one crucial condition. This is the most common trap—answers that are "close but not quite."
2. Introduces Irrelevant Information
The situation includes factors not mentioned in the principle and bases the conclusion on those irrelevant factors rather than the principle's requirements.
3. Reverses the Conditional Logic
If the principle says A → B, the wrong answer applies it as B → A. The logical direction is backwards.
4. Confuses Necessary and Sufficient Conditions
Treats a necessary condition (required but not enough) as if it were sufficient (enough by itself), or vice versa.
5. Violates When Asked to Conform (or Vice Versa)
When the question asks which situation conforms, this answer violates the principle. Always check whether you're looking for conformity or violation.
6. Too General or Too Specific
The situation is either broader than the principle's scope (applying to cases the principle doesn't cover) or more narrow (adding restrictions the principle doesn't include).
7. Ambiguous on Key Requirements
The situation doesn't clearly state whether crucial conditions are met, leaving you to infer or assume information the principle requires.
⚠️ The Inference Trap
Don't infer missing information to make an answer work. If the principle requires that condition X be present, and the answer doesn't explicitly state or clearly imply that X is present, that answer doesn't conform—even if X "could" be present or "probably" is. Work only with what's explicitly stated or necessarily implied.
Common Types of Principles in Match Questions
While principles vary infinitely, certain types appear frequently. Recognizing these patterns helps you identify conditions quickly:
1. Conditional Action Principles
Specify when an action should or shouldn't be taken based on conditions.
Example: "A doctor should recommend a treatment only if the benefits outweigh the risks and the patient consents."
Conditions: Benefits > Risks AND Patient consent
Action: Recommend treatment
2. Responsibility/Liability Principles
Define when someone is responsible or liable for outcomes.
Example: "A person is morally responsible for a harm if they intended the harm or should have foreseen it."
Conditions: Intended harm OR Foreseeable harm
Outcome: Moral responsibility
3. Entitlement/Desert Principles
Specify what people deserve or are entitled to based on characteristics or actions.
Example: "A worker deserves a bonus if and only if they exceeded their performance goals and demonstrated initiative."
Conditions: Exceeded goals AND Demonstrated initiative
Entitlement: Bonus
4. Fairness/Justice Principles
Establish standards for fair treatment or just distribution.
Example: "A policy is fair only if it treats similar cases similarly unless a relevant difference exists."
Conditions: Similar treatment for similar cases OR Relevant difference justifies different treatment
5. Prioritization Principles
Rank competing values or establish which considerations take precedence.
Example: "When public safety conflicts with individual privacy, public safety should take priority unless the privacy invasion is extreme."
Hierarchy: Public safety > Privacy (with exception)
6. Prohibition Principles
Define when actions are forbidden or impermissible.
Example: "An action should be prohibited if it harms others and serves no legitimate purpose."
Conditions: Harms others AND No legitimate purpose
Outcome: Prohibition
Advanced Techniques for Match Principles
Technique 1: Create a Conditions Checklist
Before reading answer choices, write a quick checklist of all conditions the principle requires. As you read each answer, check off conditions as they're satisfied.
🧪 Checklist Example
Principle: "Publish research findings only if peer-reviewed, verified, and not funded by interested parties."
Checklist:
- □ Peer-reviewed
- □ Verified
- □ Not funded by interested parties
- □ Conclusion: Should publish (if all checked) or shouldn't publish (if any unchecked)
Technique 2: Diagram Complex Conditionals
For principles with multiple conditional statements, create a visual diagram showing the logical connections.
Principle: "If evidence is obtained illegally, it should be excluded unless public safety requires its use and no legal alternative exists."
Diagram:
Obtained illegally → Exclude
UNLESS (Public safety requires it ∧ No legal alternative)
Illegal → Exclude UNLESS (Safety ∧ ¬Alternative)
Technique 3: The Negation Test
For "if and only if" principles, test both directions. Check that the outcome occurs when conditions are met AND doesn't occur when conditions aren't met.
Technique 4: Eliminate by Missing Conditions
Scan answer choices for any that clearly lack one or more required conditions. Eliminate these immediately without full analysis.
Technique 5: Watch for Scope Shifts
If the principle applies to "employees," an answer about "contractors" may not conform unless contractors are explicitly included in "employees" for that context.
✓ Precision Checklist
Before selecting an answer, verify:
- Every condition is explicitly met (not assumed or inferred)
- No conditions are violated or contradicted
- The conclusion matches what the principle requires
- No irrelevant factors drive the conclusion
- Scope aligns with the principle's domain
- Logical direction is correct (not reversed)
Match Principles vs. Other Principle Question Types
Understanding how match principles questions relate to other principle question types clarifies the specific skills required:
| Question Type | Stimulus | Answer Choices | Task |
|---|---|---|---|
| Match Principles (Conform) | General principle | Specific situations | Find which situation satisfies the principle |
| Identify/Justify Principles | Specific argument | General principles | Find which principle justifies the argument |
| Parallel Principles | Specific argument | Specific situations | Find situation following same principle |
| Principle Violations | General principle | Specific situations | Find which situation violates the principle |
💡 Key Distinction
Match principles is application, not identification. You're not finding what principle exists—you're given the principle and must apply it correctly to concrete scenarios. This requires different skills:
- Identify principles: Abstraction skills (specific → general)
- Match principles: Application skills (general → specific)
Both directions—abstraction and application—are fundamental to legal reasoning and appear throughout LSAT Logical Reasoning.
How to Practice Match Principles Questions
Effective practice builds conditional logic skills and precise condition-checking habits:
Phase 1: Conditional Logic Foundation (Week 1-2)
- Master conditional structures: Practice translating "if," "only if," "if and only if," "unless" into logical forms
- Work with 15-20 match principles questions from official PrepTests untimed
- Create condition checklists: For each principle, list all requirements before checking answers
- Diagram complex principles: Use symbols to visualize conditional relationships
- Verify every condition: Check that each answer satisfies or fails to satisfy each requirement
Phase 2: Precision and Elimination (Week 3-4)
- Focus on "if and only if" structures: These appear frequently and require checking both directions
- Practice identifying missing conditions: Learn to spot when crucial information is unstated
- Build a wrong answer catalog: Track common traps (missing one condition, irrelevant factors, reversed logic)
- Work on compound conditions: Principles with multiple "and"/"or" requirements
- Begin timing: Start at 90 seconds per question
Phase 3: Integration and Speed (Week 5+)
- Complete full Logical Reasoning sections: Practice with all question types mixed
- Target 75-80 seconds per question: Match principles shouldn't take as long as parallel reasoning
- Aim for 85-90% accuracy: These are highly learnable questions
- Review every question: Even correct answers—strengthen pattern recognition
- Practice the checklist method: Make condition-checking automatic
📈 Mastery Indicators
- You can break down principles into clear condition lists in 15-20 seconds
- You recognize conditional structures instantly (if/only if/unless)
- You eliminate 2-3 answers quickly based on missing conditions
- You check all conditions systematically without missing any
- You achieve 85%+ accuracy in timed practice
- You complete questions in 75-80 seconds consistently
Official LSAT Resources for Match Principles Questions
Use only official materials from the Law School Admission Council (LSAC) and authorized partners for practice:
Primary Official Resources
- LSAC Official Logical Reasoning Overview - Official information about Logical Reasoning section and skills tested
- LSAC Official LSAT Prep - Official preparation materials and study resources
- Official LSAT PrepTests - Published PrepTests with real, previously administered questions
- Khan Academy LSAT Prep - Free official LSAT preparation in partnership with LSAC
- LSAC Sample Questions - Free sample Logical Reasoning questions with explanations
Recommended PrepTest Range
For current question styles and difficulty:
- PrepTests 62-94: Most recent exams with current format
- SuperPrep I & II: Official books with comprehensive explanations
- 10 Actual, Official LSAT PrepTests: Collections of authentic exams
- PrepTests 52+: Modern LSAT format with comparative reading
📊 Match Principles Frequency
Match principles questions typically appear 1-3 times per Logical Reasoning section, making them moderately common. Combined with principle identification questions (3-5 per section), principle questions as a category represent a significant portion of the test—approximately 4-8 principle questions per section, or 8-16 total across both scored LR sections.
Strategic Importance: Given their frequency and learnability (high accuracy achievable through practice), principle questions—including match principles—offer excellent return on study investment. Master conditional logic and condition-checking, and you'll consistently earn these points.
⚠️ Official Materials Only
Always practice with official LSAC questions. Match principles questions require precisely crafted conditional logic and exact condition-matching. Unofficial questions may not replicate LSAC's logical precision, leading to bad habits in condition-checking. Use commercial resources for strategy instruction, but apply those strategies exclusively to official LSAC materials.
Frequently Asked Questions
Test Day Strategy for Match Principles Questions
✓ Quick Reference Checklist
- Read the principle carefully and identify all conditions
- Note logical connectors (if/only if/unless/and/or)
- Create mental condition checklist or write brief notes
- Determine what outcome the principle requires
- Read each answer systematically
- Check each condition against your list
- Verify the conclusion matches what the principle requires
- Eliminate answers with missing conditions or irrelevant factors
- Select the answer that satisfies all requirements
Time Management
⏱️ Optimal Timing
- Simple principles (1-2 conditions): 60-75 seconds
- Moderate principles (3-4 conditions): 75-90 seconds
- Complex principles (5+ conditions or compound logic): 90-105 seconds
Speed Strategy: The time you invest understanding the principle and creating your condition checklist saves time evaluating answers. Spend 15-20 seconds on the principle, then quickly check each answer against your checklist.
Confidence Builders
- These questions are mechanical: Follow a systematic process and you'll consistently succeed
- High accuracy is achievable: 85-90% accuracy is realistic with practice
- Conditional logic is learnable: Unlike some intuitive skills, this is pure technique
- Frequency makes them matter: 2-6 match principles questions across both LR sections impact your score
- Wrong answers are predictable: They follow patterns you can learn to recognize instantly
Key Takeaways
Match principles questions in LSAT Logical Reasoning test your ability to apply abstract rules to concrete situations—a fundamental skill for legal practice where attorneys must determine whether specific facts fall under general legal principles, statutes, or precedents. Success requires understanding the logical direction: you're moving from general to specific, applying a stated principle to particular scenarios.
The core skill is precise condition-checking. Principles establish requirements that must be satisfied for certain conclusions to follow. Your task is systematically verifying whether each situation meets all requirements. This demands careful attention to conditional logic (if, only if, if and only if, unless), compound conditions (and, or), and quantifiers (all, some, most, none) that define the principle's scope and application.
Clear Conditions + Systematic Checking + Precise Logic = Consistent Accuracy
The most common error is selecting situations that satisfy most but not all conditions—the "close enough" trap. Test makers exploit the tendency to look for approximate matches. Combat this by creating condition checklists and verifying every requirement before selecting an answer. A situation missing even one condition doesn't conform, regardless of how similar it otherwise seems.
Match principles questions differ from principle identification questions in logical direction: match principles moves from abstract to concrete (application), while identify principles moves from concrete to abstract (generalization). Both skills are essential for legal reasoning and appear throughout LSAT Logical Reasoning. Mastering conditional logic benefits both question types and extends to sufficient assumption, necessary assumption, and inference questions.
🎯 Your Action Plan
- Master conditional logic structures (if, only if, if and only if, unless)
- Obtain official LSAT PrepTests from LSAC.org
- Isolate 30-40 match principles questions for focused practice
- Practice creating condition checklists for each principle
- Diagram complex conditional structures using symbols
- Build a catalog of wrong answer patterns (missing conditions, irrelevant factors)
- Practice checking both directions for if and only if principles
- Master compound conditions with and/or connectors
- Track improvement in speed (target: 75-80 seconds per question)
- Aim for 85-90% accuracy through systematic condition-checking
With mastery of conditional logic, systematic condition-checking habits developed through deliberate practice, and understanding of common wrong answer patterns, you'll approach match principles questions with confidence, accurately determining which specific situations conform to stated general rules and consistently earning these points toward your target LSAT score.