PrepTest 120

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
The model of car stolen most often was the same the past 2 years, so the car model affects the chances a car will be stolen.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument has two phrases that are almost always relevant to the flaw in the argument—"chances," and "most often."

"Chances" is a discussion of risk, or percentages. "Most often" is a discussion of the number of something. The former has to do with the likelihood that an event will happen, whereas the latter has to do with the amount of times it happens.

While related, they are different! And they reflect a common flaw—Percent vs. Amount. The "chances" that a car will be stolen is the percent of those cars that are stolen. The car stolen most often is the car that was taken more times than any others—that's a number. This is a problem if, say, one car model makes up 75% of all cars on the road. In that case, the number of those cars stolen could be very high while the chances that that car is stolen instead of a rarer or more valuable model is relatively low.

Let's find an answer highlighting this shift.

Answer Explanation:
This answer addresses an issue with jumping between percentages and amounts. Whenever you see a discussion of the relative size of different groups, that's a good sign that it's talking about such a shift. This is therefore the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
The risk of something or the chances it'll happen is usually represented by a percentage. A discussion of what happens "most" or "least often" is a discussion of the number of times something happens. These concepts are frequently jumped between on the LSAT, so look out for these phrases!

Incorrect. The argument cites the model of car as a factor that "greatly affects" the chances of a car being stolen, not the only factor, so this answer is incorrect.

Incorrect. Any reason for that model being stolen most often aligns with the argument, so the Advocate doesn't fail to consider that this is a possibility. What matters is how often it's stolen, not the reason behind it.

Incorrect. The argument assumes that these individuals take the model into account, but not that they ignore other factors. As long as the model is a key factor in the decision, the argument holds.

Incorrect. The argument doesn't make a recommendation, so it makes no assumptions about what "should" be done.