PrepTest 106

[lcid:3522] Prep Test 106 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S3 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Game show host: Humans Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Bizarro / Errors in Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

Competition - 5 analysts. 1 chimpanzee. $1350. 1 month. Who will invest better?
Answer - The monkey.
Conclusion - Humans aren’t better at apes at investing.

Answer Anticipation

We. Would. Watch. This. Show.
But what’s the logical flaw here? Well, it’s drawing a conclusion about humans and apes generally, but it’s based on 5 analysts and 1 chimpanzee. It also looks at only a one-month period. The “study” (if you want to call it that) here is way too limited to justify the very broad conclusion, so we should look for any answer highlighting that bad generalization/Sampling flaw.

Answer choices

  1. A
    A conclusion is drawn Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    This answer highlights the jump between one chimpanzee and all apes, so this answer can be eliminated in this Bizarro question.
  2. B
    No evidence is offered Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    It doesn’t matter if the chimpanzee understands what it’s doing - just whether it beats the humans. Since understanding is out of scope, this answer doesn’t highlight a flaw in the reasoning, and it is therefore correct.
  3. C
    A broad conclusion is Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    The sample size for this “study” was five, which is too small a sample to draw a conclusion about all humans. This answer highlights the Sampling flaw of the stimulus, so we can eliminate it.
  4. D
    Too general a conclusion Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    This answer highlights the jump from a one-month investment period to a conclusion about all investing, so it’s an error made by the Game Show Host.
  5. E
    No evidence is considered Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Similar to (D), this answer speaks to the temporal flaw, with the study being limited to a month, while the conclusion is about all investing.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion