PrepTest 144, Section 3, Question 20
Advertisement: In a recent survey, a sample representative(46 more words not shown)
The argument in the advertisement(12 more words not shown)
- AIt overlooks the(30 more words not shown)
- BIt takes for(33 more words not shown)
- CIt fails to(29 more words not shown)
- DIt takes for(26 more words not shown)
- EIt fails to(30 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Who is most likely to switch insurance companies? Someone who finds a better deal.
That matters when we look at this survey. It represents new Popelka customers, the people who already made the switch. Perhaps they were paying especially high prices at their old companies. Perhaps a new-customer offer made switching attractive. Either way, their savings don't automatically tell us what people who stayed elsewhere could save.
Imagine Popelka charging $750 for comparable coverage. Someone paying $1,000 at another company could save $250 by switching. Someone already paying $700 would pay more. A survey of the people who switched could include lots of the first kind of customer and few of the second.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks us to explain why the advertisement goes too far. A sample can accurately represent all the new customers without representing everyone insured elsewhere. We need to question that change in the population, not simply deny that the surveyed customers saved money.
Working the answers
- A
Some people saving little or nothing is compatible with the conclusion that most people could save hundreds. The argument doesn't promise savings to every single person. Exceptions within the group therefore don't, by themselves, identify the main problem with extending this group's results to people who haven't switched.
- B
Comparing new Popelka customers with longtime Popelka customers is different from the comparison the conclusion makes. The question is whether people currently insured by other companies could save by switching. They could receive better or worse rates than longtime customers without settling whether switching reduces their own current costs.
- C
Another company might save people even more while Popelka still saves them hundreds. For example, saving $400 elsewhere wouldn't prevent a $250 saving at Popelka. The advertisement claims substantial savings, not the greatest savings available anywhere.
- D
If customers underestimated their savings, the actual savings would be larger than reported. That would not undermine the claim that switching saved them money. The relevant gap concerns whether people who haven't switched would get similar savings, not whether these customers accidentally reported too little.
- ECorrect
People who can save hundreds have a stronger reason to become new Popelka customers. They could therefore be overrepresented in that group relative to the wider population insured elsewhere. People already getting excellent rates may stay where they are and never enter the survey's population. The survey could accurately describe the switchers while giving a misleading picture of what most other policyholders could save.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.