PrepTest 106

[lcid:3521] Prep Test 106 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S2 Logical reasoning

Question prompt

Advertisement: A leading economist Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

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

Errors in Reasoning Questions

Stimulus Summary

People who own laptops earn more money, so earning a laptop leads to a higher-paying job.

Answer Anticipation

When dealing with an Errors in Reasoning question, we should be reading with an eye towards identifying elements that are associated with common flaws. Here, we get a big one - the conclusion is causal. It states that owning a laptop “led to” a higher-paying job. In other words, owning a laptop caused people to get that higher-paying job. Is this based on a correlation? It sure is - it’s based on a study that showed those who owned laptops also make 25% more on average (when looking just at people who use computers at their place of employment). So the argument jumps between a correlation and causation, meaning this has a (wait for it) Correlation/Causation flaw. We could head to the answers with that anticipation and be fine, but there’s another step we can take. Generally, answers that discuss Correlation/Causation flaws but don’t explicitly mention them as such will talk about alternative causes for both correlated phenomena, or reversed causality. And when reversed causality makes sense, that tends to be the answer. Here, does it make sense that earning more money could cause one to buy a laptop? Sure - that makes a lot of sense, in fact. Maybe more sense than the argument’s conclusion! So while the answer won’t definitely bring up reversed causality, we should be sure to look for it as a distinct possibility.

Answer choices

  1. A
    It attempts to support Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    The argument does reach a generalization, and it is based on a sample. However, that sample is those who use computers at their place of employment, and there’s no indication that this is a small number of individuals.
  2. B
    Its conclusion merely restates Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    The conclusion is causal, while the premise is a correlation. While similar, they’re distinct, so the conclusion isn’t merely a restatement of the premise. This argument isn’t Circular.
  3. C
    It concludes that one Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem
    This answer points out that the argument presents evidence that just as easily proves the reverse causality, as we noted in our Anticipation. Those with higher-paying jobs own laptops at a higher rate. The argument concludes this means owning a laptop leads to a higher-paying job, but it’s at least as likely that making more money leads to one buying a laptop with those extra funds. This answer describes the Correlation/Causation flaw of the stimulus, so it’s the correct answer.
  4. D
    It offers information as Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    A correlation creates the possibility that a causal relationship exists between the two phenomena - it doesn’t show that causality doesn’t exist. So there’s no contradiction between the premises and conclusion here.
  5. E
    It uncritically projects currently Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    The conclusion is about the past (“led to”), so it’s not projecting into the future.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion