PrepTest 145

Incorrect. There's no causality in the conclusion (or in an assumption), so there's no correlation/causation flaw.

Incorrect. First, the "sample" to determine percentages on the team is the entire student body. Second, there's no sample for the actual conclusion—the popularity of the sport with audiences.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
LtE: 15% of students are on the track team, but you cover basketball (5% of students on the team). So you don't cover the high school's most popular sports.

Answer Anticipation:
The Letter concludes that the paper doesn't cover the high school's most popular sports based on the number of students who are on teams for two different sports. That metric is useful for determining which team is most popular for the high school students to join, but that's not necessarily the popularity that the newspaper is claiming—it's possible they're more interested in what's popular with audiences. This misinterpretation of a key term in the newspaper's claim means that the rebuttal doesn't necessarily address the argument and is thus flawed.

Answer Explanation:
The Letter assumes that the claim about popularity addresses how popular a sport is to play, not how popular a sport is to watch. This misinterpretation of a key term is a flaw in the argument.

Key Takeaway:
There are some terms that lend themselves to misinterpretation, and many of them have to do with viewpoint. "Popular" by definition is attached to a group that has a certain view, so failing to determine that group leads to misinterpretation. Another similar recurring pattern is failing to address who the "risk" applies to in an argument on that subject.

Incorrect. The argument isn't circular—it uses statistics to support a conclusion about a claim made by the newspaper about popularity.

Incorrect. The Letter uses statistics to address the claim made by the newspaper—while it doesn't address the actual claim made, it does address a claim and not the newspaper as being biased, so this ad hominem answer is wrong.