I loved the way this book was structured and how it explained the solutions to problems, but several times the letters and numbers in the answer keys were misprinted and didn't match up with the problems. It was very confusing and disappointing.

I have one word for this book: wow! I picked this up as a cheap introduction for the LSAT about a year ago. I find myself coming back to it every so often to reread and refresh myself with the plethora of information contained within. I didn't expect to be so impressed with this book, but it has put me on the path to success with the LSAT. My scores are far above average and I think its mostly because of the help I found with this test guide. The explanations are phenomenal.

I thought this was a nice intro prep book, but you will definitely want to buy the LSAT prep book with the actual tests to practice. I really like the simple tips, and the simple breakdown of how to approach the questions without saturating you with too much info. I think the best application is to start with this to get comfortable with how to approach the questions, and then practice using the real LSAT tests. I also appreciated the calming tone the author had. Instead of getting you all jacked up about how hard the test is and how much you have to study, she seemed a lot more practical.

This book is wrought with typos. It makes me wonder: If there are so many problems I can already see, how many are there that I can't see (e.g. Questions unlike those you will see on the real LSAT, flawed reasoning, incomplete information, etc). Stay away...

This was the first test prep book I used. I just finished it over the weekend. I will certainly have to buy a more indepth book to continue my preparation. The logic games section has good tips, but the book and this section in particular, is just too short.

This book made reviewing for the LSAT easy. I suggest getting a few different LSAT prep books and also a bunch of real tests. Some books are better than others, and this one is a really good overall view of the test and strategies. I think this one and the Arco book are good. I also foudn NOVA's to be good. Kaplan and PR were waaaay too basic and was mostly annoying filler.

Well, i see lots of people have different ideas about books, so the best thing to do is to try out a bunch and see what works for you. I found this one really good in the AR section and RC sections. Also a good strategy for applying and getting into law schools in general. Two thumbs up.

I do not recommend this book. There are many errors in both the reasoning and answers to problems. You can't seriously study using a flawed textbook such as this. The explanations for Analytical Reasoning were very confusing and too brief. If you need a good LSAT prep book, I recommend the Princeton Review book. This book was very bad. It frustrated more than it helped.

Up through chapter 5, things were straightforward and satisfactory. But beware, the Analytical Reasoning Section, starting with chapter 6, is fraught with critical errors.

Consider page 74. One fact read, "The ethnarch of Sparta can only attend on THURSDAY. Helen is his favorite play, so it MUST BE SCHEDULED FOR THAT DAY." [my emphasis]

But on page 75, a question asks, "which of the following CANNOT be true?" [author's emphasis]

Remarkably, choice C -- "Helen IS performed on a Wednesday" -- was NOT listed as the correct answer, despite blatantly being false [RECALL ABOVE THAT A PRELIMINARY FACT LISTED THURSDAY AS THE ONLY DAY IN WHICH HELEN COULD BE PERFORMED].

Further, preposterous logic is found in her "Roman Republic" question set. The author explicitly tells readers not to use backward logic, but this is the only way to arrive at the answers for questions 7-8 on pages 72-73. Moreover, these two questions in particular EACH PROVIDE TWO ANSWERS THAT SATISFY "MUST BE TRUE" CONDITIONS. For question 7, choices B and D run on the same backward logic. For question 8, ditto for choices B and E.

The only redeeming feature of this book is its avoidance of tricks and gimmicks. But this does not compensate for serious errors that definitely should have been caught by a law professor, who apparently fails to follow her own advice [paying attention to details].

You can rely on this book only for its info about law schools and shorthand notation. But avoid its error-abundant practice questions at all costs.

Up through chapter 5, things were straightforward and satisfactory. But beware, the Analytical Reasoning Section, starting with chapter 6, is fraught with critical errors.

Consider page 74. One fact read, "The ethnarch of Sparta can only attend on THURSDAY. Helen is his favorite play, so it MUST BE SCHEDULED FOR THAT DAY." [my emphasis]

But on page 75, a question asks, "which of the following CANNOT be true?" [author's emphasis]

Remarkably, choice C -- "Helen IS performed on a Wednesday" -- was NOT listed as the correct answer, despite blatantly being false [RECALL ABOVE THAT A PRELIMINARY FACT LISTED THURSDAY AS THE ONLY DAY IN WHICH HELEN COULD BE PERFORMED].

Further, preposterous logic is found in her "Roman Republic" question set. The author explicitly tells readers not to use backward logic, but this is the only way to arrive at the answers for questions 7-8 on pages 72-73. Moreover, these two questions in particular EACH PROVIDE TWO ANSWERS THAT SATISFY "MUST BE TRUE" CONDITIONS. For question 7, choices B and D run on the same backward logic. For question 8, ditto for choices B and E.

The only redeeming feature of this book is its avoidance of tricks and gimmicks. But this does not compensate for serious errors that definitely should have been caught by a law professor, who apparently fails to follow her own advice [paying attention to details].

You can rely on this book only for its info about law schools and shorthand notation. But avoid its error-abundant practice questions at all costs.

This book provides a straightforward look at the LSAT. The tips are useful and the content is easy to comprehend for people who are interested in entering law school. "LSAT for Dummies" succeeds in making the test seem less daunting and absolutely doable for future LSAT testers. I recommend this book as introductory material to the LSAT.

I have been out of school for a number of years, and have only recently decided to pursue a law degree. Since I'm kind of just feeling around this law thing, I have sampled a number of lsat prep books and found this one particularly useful. I thought it "reached" me at least, and can recommend it to many other prospective law students. Someone else bought it for me, but I'd say it's definitely worth the money.

This book really helped me to prepare for the LSAT. The practice questions and explanations are excellent.

This book is so awful, please don't waste your money as I did!! It has WRONG answers in it. For example, on page 86...she gives the answer to number 17 in the logic games and the explanation for it. The rule says: "The plays will be performed on six consecutive days, beginning on Tuesday." Which means that Monday there will be NO plays--hello! The author says Monday such and such will be shown, etc. Really bad writing. Spend your money on the KAPLAN book. This one doesn't even teach you about the contra-positive rule. PLEASE look elsewhere!!