Logical reasoning PrepTest 141 · Section 2 · Question 9

Incorrect. Two issues here. First, this answer choice highlights that those who smoke are "unlikely" to stop smoking because they stop seeing ads, but that still leaves open the possibility that a significant number do stop smoking, which would still play into the argument. Additionally, this answer doesn't address the decline in first-time smokers, which is noted as being "especially" significant.

Incorrect. This distinction isn't tied into the argument in the stimulus at all, so we don't know what impact it has on the argument. Additionally, we know that there are stringent restrictions on tobacco ads, so even if the ones on print media are slightly less strict, they still exist.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Weaken

Stimulus Summary:
Countries with restrictions on cigarette ads have seen a decline in smoking rates and new smoker rates. Therefore, these ads are probably working.

Answer Anticipation:
While the conclusion is phrased in a slightly convoluted manner, it says that claims a causal relationship don't exist are disputable—which is another way of saying that there's evidence of a causal relationship. Whenever a Weaken question has a causal conclusion, you should immediately check for a correlation/causation flaw, as a substantial portion of these questions commit that flaw.

Here, the premises are correlations—countries with ad bans are also countries that have seen a decrease in smoking rates. Since this Weaken question commits a correlation/causation flaw, we should look for answers that:

(1) Identify an alternative cause
(2) Identify counterexamples
(3) Establish the causality is reversed (though here, the timeline seems to suggest the bans preceded the decline in smoking rates—but it's not explicitly stated, so we should still look for this answer)

Answer Explanation:
This answer choice suggests an alternative cause that could lead to both the new restrictions and the decline in smoking rates (and, especially, first-time smoker rates). If societal norms have shifted, that could lead to people quitting smoking or failing to start while legislators pass restrictions on ads, even if those two outcomes aren't causally related.

Key Takeaway:
Weaken (and Strengthen) questions frequently feature correlation/causation flaws—it's one of the strongest trends on the LSAT. When you're dealing with one of these questions, you should actively look for that flaw.

Incorrect. First, this answer wouldn't address the decline in first-time smokers. Second, even if "most" smokers keep smoking no matter what restrictions are placed on ads, a significant number could quit, and that could be driven by the decline in ads.

Incorrect. Without tying this in to smoking rates or smokers, this answer is wholly out of scope in discussing the people who aren't influenced by ads—especially non-tobacco ads.