Point of Disagreement questions appear on comparative passages and ask you to identify the specific claim on which the two authors take opposing positions. Not just that they differ in tone, emphasis, or subject — but the precise proposition where one author is for and the other is against. This is the RC equivalent of LR's Point at Issue, scaled up to full paired passages instead of short speaker exchanges.
Point of Disagreement requires you to hold both authors' positions in your head simultaneously and identify the specific claim where they collide. The skill is precise identification of disagreement — not just that the two perspectives differ, but pinpointing exactly what they differ about.
The most common trap is confusing difference with disagreement. Two authors can discuss related but non-overlapping topics, or emphasize different aspects of a shared topic, without disagreeing on any specific claim. For a genuine disagreement, both authors have to address the same issue and take opposing stances on it. An answer stating a proposition that one author affirms but the other never discusses is not a point of disagreement, even if their overall views feel divergent.
Because this type requires two voices, it appears only on comparative passages. It is the RC analogue of LR's Point at Issue — same fundamental skill, applied to passage-length arguments instead of short speaker stimuli.
The correct answer must satisfy two conditions simultaneously. Apply both tests to every surviving candidate.
Test 1 — Both authors must have a clear view on the claim. If one author never addresses the issue, there is no disagreement to find. You must be able to point to specific language in Passage A that tells you where A stands, and specific language in Passage B that tells you where B stands. If you have to speculate about either author's position, the answer is wrong.
Test 2 — The two views must be opposite. Passing Test 1 tells you both authors have a view; Test 2 asks whether those views are incompatible. The cleanest formulation is the yes/no test: Author A would say "yes" to this claim; Author B would say "no." If both would say yes (or both no), it's shared ground, not disagreement.
Only answers that pass both tests can be correct. This is why a mental matrix of each author's positions is so useful: you can scan for a row where A and B take opposing stances, which is mechanically the structure of the right answer.
Only one question in the corpus exists. It is worth studying carefully because it illustrates all the elements of the type in clean form.
Source: PT78, Q4 (Difficulty 4). Stem: "The authors of the passages would be most likely to disagree over whether."
The five answer choices were: (A) juries should be more forthcoming about the reasoning behind their verdicts; (B) laws are subject to scrutiny and debate by reasonable people; (C) it is likely that elected officials are more biased in their decision making than jurors are; (D) it is within the purview of juries not only to apply the law but to interpret it; (E) police and prosecutors should have less discretion to decide which violations of the law to pursue.
Correct Answer: (D). One author defends the position that juries legitimately interpret the law (jury nullification as a legitimate power); the other confines juries to applying the law as given. Both authors have clear, opposite views on this exact claim — the two tests pass cleanly. The losing choices fail in predictable ways: they either describe a claim one author never addresses or a claim both authors would in fact agree on.
The workflow mirrors LR Point at Issue, but scaled to the larger surface area of two full passages.
Step 1 — Map both authors' positions as you read. As you work through Passage B, flag the places where it stakes out a claim that Passage A also addressed. A mental matrix helps: issue on the left, A's view and B's view on the right. The places where the two views are opposite are your candidate answers.
Step 2 — Predict the likely disagreement. Before looking at the choices, ask: where do these passages most clearly clash? The strongest disagreement is usually a single central issue rather than a peripheral detail.
Step 3 — Apply the Two-Test Method to each choice. For every answer, ask both: do both authors have a view on this? and are those views opposite? Eliminate everything that fails either test.
Step 4 — Confirm by attribution. For your finalist, be able to say in one sentence what Author A thinks and what Author B thinks, with textual support for each. If you can't, the answer isn't really supported.
The correct answer states a specific proposition that one author affirms and the other denies. It is phrased neutrally — not in either author's preferred framing — so that either affirmation or denial is a coherent position. It is specific enough to distinguish it from related but different claims, and it lies clearly within the scope of both passages.
Stems use the signature phrasing "would be most likely to disagree over whether," which frames the answer choices as propositions. Answer choices in the single example average about 16.2 words; stems are about 14 words.
Two trap shapes account for nearly all incorrect answers on this type.
Trap 1 — Agreement masquerading as disagreement. States a claim both authors would actually affirm. Test-takers assume that because the passages have divergent overall perspectives they must disagree on everything, but comparative passages usually share substantial common ground. Defense: Test 2 — if both would say "yes," it's not disagreement, no matter how topical the claim is.
Trap 2 — Only one author addresses it. States a claim that appears in one passage but that the other passage never takes a position on. You cannot have a disagreement when only one side has weighed in. Defense: Test 1 — you must be able to cite specific language from both passages showing each author's view.
With only 1 question across 2,479 in the corpus, Point of Disagreement is tied with Method of Reasoning as the rarest RC type. Two factors explain the rarity.
Absorbed by other types. Most comparative-passage disagreement questions get classified under Inference ("it can be inferred that the authors disagree about...") or Author's Attitude ("the two authors' attitudes differ in..."). In effect Point of Disagreement is a specific subtype of these that LSAC rarely labels separately.
Limited applicability. The type only works on comparative passages, which are already only 11.4% of all passages. Even within comparative sets, most questions focus on agreement, shared subject matter, or structural relationship rather than specific disagreement.
vs. Author's Attitude. Attitude asks about one author's evaluative stance toward a subject. Disagreement asks where two authors' stances directly conflict. Attitude is a single-voice question; Disagreement is inherently two-voice.
vs. Inference. Many inference questions on comparative passages functionally ask about disagreement ("it can be inferred that the authors disagree..."). Point of Disagreement is the explicit version — when the stem directly asks what they disagree about rather than wrapping the question in inference language.
vs. Adapting to a New Context. Adapting asks where two views converge or how they might interact in a new case. Disagreement asks where they diverge within the material of the passages themselves.
vs. LR Point at Issue. Same fundamental skill, but applied to passage-length arguments rather than short stimuli. The Two-Test Method is identical in both contexts.
Classification note: With only 1 question, this is effectively a labeling rarity. Most passage-comparison disagreement questions are classified under Inference or Author's Attitude. The existence of this label suggests an intent to create a distinct type that was never widely adopted in test construction.
The signature phrasing "disagree over whether" frames the answer choices as propositions. Recognizing the stem is half the work — it's your signal to pull up both authors' position maps and apply the Two-Test Method.