Logical reasoning PrepTest 117 · Section 3 · Question 22

Incorrect. "[V]ery few" isn't really a most statement and one of the terms in the conclusion ("safe drivers") isn't in a premise so this has at least two points where it isn't parallel.

Incorrect. There are no most statements here, so this is a quick elimination.

Incorrect. The premises here are conditionals ("all") not quantified (most) statements.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Shop for groceries max 3x/month—most—Regularly buy frozen dinners
Hallstown—most—Shop for groceries max 3x/month
Therefore — Hallstown—most—Regularly buy frozen dinners

Answer Anticipation:
When you see quantifiers in a Flawed Parallel Reasoning, you should be happy! The flaw is almost certainly related to improperly drawing an inference based on those quantifiers, and you can find an answer that matches the pattern. Here, the argument is flawed in that it tries to chain together most statements, but the only inference that can be drawn from two most statements is when they share a first term. So we should look for an answer that follows the same pattern:
A—most—B
B—most—C
Therefore — A—most—C

Answer Explanation:
This answer has three most statements, so we should diagram it out:
Commute to work—most—Drive sedans
Highland County—most—Commute to work
Therefore — Highland County—most—Drive sedans
That's the same structure as the stimulus, so this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Quantifiers in a Flawed Parallel Reasoning question should be a source of joy! You should be able to eliminate at least a few answers that don't have the matching quantifiers.

Incorrect. One of the premises here is a conditional ("only") not a most statement so we can rule this answer out.