Logical reasoning PrepTest 130 · Section 1 · Question 7

Incorrect. The premise of this argument is causal ("because...to improve"), so it doesn't have a correlation/causation flaw. A causal conclusion can be validly based on a causal premise.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Candidates don't like when they're in negative ads, but most winners of elections were in these ads, so they must help people get elected.

Answer Anticipation:
Almost every election has been won by candidates who wear shoes in public, but clearly that didn't help them get elected—(almost?) every candidate wears shoes in public! The conclusion here is causal ("benefits"), but it's based on a correlation, making this a correlation/causation flaw. It's possible these candidates won in spite of, not because of, these negative ads.

Answer Explanation:
This answer has the same correlation/causation jump, and it even parallels the premise about the people in question disliking the supposed cause of their success! Much like it's possible that almost all candidates have been subject to negative ads, so of course most winners have had them, it's possible that almost all actors have had harsh reviews and have won awards in spite of them, not because of them. Same jump, same flaw, correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
As questions get harder, answer choices will get closer together and thus tougher to distinguish. When this happens, you should feel comfortable with deferring on answers to narrow down your choices to 2-3, and then compare them to see what the differences are. That should help you determine which answer is correct and which answer is a trap.

Incorrect. First, there's a term shift here between passing classes and academic success (after all, Cs get degrees). Second, while there is a jump from correlation to causation here, it's different from the jump in the stimulus. There, the premise is that most people with the effect (winning) had the cause (negative ads); here, the premise is that most people with the cause (studying) have the effect (passing). That reversal invalidates this answer.

Incorrect. There's no causation here, just subjective preferences.

Incorrect. This argument is flawed, and it deals with causality, but it doesn't jump from a correlation in a premise to causation in the conclusion. Rather, it concludes that people must find something acceptable because they do something that results in that thing. However, you can't assume that people will subjectively feel a certain way just because it's logical—people are illogical and contradictory all the time.