PrepTest 120, Section 3, Question 8
Consumer advocate: There is ample evidence that the(40 more words not shown)
The consumer advocate's reasoning is(9 more words not shown)
- Afails to address(27 more words not shown)
- Bfails to address(17 more words not shown)
- Cfails to address(29 more words not shown)
- Dpresumes, without providing(19 more words not shown)
- Epresumes, without providing(20 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
I can imagine thieves preferring some models over others. But does this evidence show that any particular car is more likely to be stolen?
What if the most-stolen model is simply the most common? Suppose it makes up 70 percent of the cars on the road. Even thieves choosing cars without any preference for a model could steal more of those cars, because there are so many available. Being stolen most often wouldn't establish a greater risk for each owner.
What we’re looking for
The same model leading the count two years in a row doesn't fix that problem. It could be the most common model both years. For the flaw question, I'd look for the missing comparison: how many cars of each model were available to be stolen? The total stolen isn't enough to establish the chance of theft for a particular car.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
A common model has more opportunities to appear in the theft count. For example, suppose there are 70 cars of one model and 30 of another, and thieves steal 10 percent of each: seven of the first model and three of the second. The first model is stolen more often, but every car faces the same theft rate.
That's the possibility the argument needs to address. Without considering how many cars of each model exist, we can't infer an owner's greater chance of theft just from a higher total number stolen.
- B
Age could matter while model matters too. The author doesn't say model is the only influence on theft risk. This answer names another possible factor without explaining why the stated evidence fails to establish the claimed effect of model. A supplies that missing explanation through the number of available cars.
- C
High resale value could explain why thieves seek out a particular model. That would fit the idea that model matters to the risk, rather than expose the mistake in using total thefts as evidence. It doesn't supply the alternative that the model merely has more cars available to steal.
- D
The argument doesn't require thieves to consider only model. They could also think about whether the car is locked, whether its owner is nearby, or whether they'll get caught. Saying model greatly affects the chance of theft leaves room for those other influences.
- E
The author isn't recommending which car anyone should buy or drive. Someone could understand a theft risk and still choose the car for other reasons. E adds a priority rule for consumers that the argument never uses. The conclusion concerns risk, not what should outweigh everything else in a purchasing decision.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.