Logical reasoning PrepTest 134 · Section 3 · Question 6
Question prompt
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: D
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Answer choices
-
Apresumes, without providing justification, Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. There's no discussion of the larger fish, so this answer is out of scope. -
Bfails to consider that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. The Resident's conclusion is limited to discussing "this pond." -
Cignores the possibility that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. The conclusion is limited to discussing the effects of large amounts of algae on "smaller fish," so this answer is out of scope in discussing fish of different sizes. -
Dignores the possibility that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D matches the stem
Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument
Valid or Flawed:
Flawed
Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning
Stimulus Summary:
LR: Each time I've seen a lot of dead small fish, I've seen a lot of algae. Therefore, too much algae must kill small fish.
Answer Anticipation:
Two big issues in this stimulus!
First, the conclusion is causal, so we should check for a correlation/causation flaw. Here, the Resident's conclusion that algae is bad for small fish comes from seeing algae and dead small fish around the same time. That's a correlation, so there's a correlation/causation flaw present in this argument.
Second, the conclusion is based on the "few times" that the Resident has witnessed this correlation—hardly a scientific or statistically valid sample!
Either of these flaws could be raised in the correct answer, so let's stay flexible.
Answer Explanation:
This answer points out one reason that a correlation/causation jump is flawed—the correlation might highlight two effects of a third phenomenon that's the true cause. For instance, maybe some type of substance dumped into the pond causes both small fish death and algal blooms. Since this answer highlights the correlation/causation flaw, it's the correct answer.
Key Takeaway:
Don't be concerned if you spot two flaws in an Errors in Reasoning question! That just opens up two potential answer choices. It only becomes a problem if both flaws you believe to be present show up in the answers—and in that case, you're wrong about one of them. -
Eignores the possibility that Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
Incorrect. The argument states that too much algae hurts smaller fish; that's compatible with too little algae also hurting them. Maybe they need to have just the right amount of algae.
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
Deeper help
Ask follow-ups on any step
Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.
Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.
Discussion
-
Why is it E and not A 2 replies
Started by JessieWhite
-
Where Video Explanations?? 0 replies
Started by Yuzhuo-Cao