Travel writer: Conclusion A vacationer should choose an airline that has had an accident in the past 5 years. ██████ ████ ███ ████ █████████████████ ███████ ████ ████ ███ ███████ ███████ ███ █ ████████ █████ █ ██████ ██ ██ ██ ███████ ███ ███ ██ ████████ ██████ ███ ████ █ ██████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ███████ ████ ████ █ █████ ███ ██████████
The travel writer knows that the average airline has 1 accident every 5 years, and so concludes that each individual airline is likely to have roughly 1 crash every 5 years—if there’s been a crash in the past 5 years, the airline probably isn’t due for another one yet.
This is a misunderstanding of averages! It’s quite possible that one airline could have a lot more than 1 crash every 5 years, and a bunch of other airlines have 0 crashes every 5 years to balance out the average. Don’t take the travel writer’s advice—try to fly with airlines that don’t crash very often!
The flawed reasoning in the ██████ ████████ ████████ ██ ████ ███████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██████████
A tossed coin ███ ████ ██ █████ ███ █████ ██ █ ████ ██ ██ █████████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ████ █████ ████ ██ ██ ███████ ██████
Wrong flaw. This isn’t a valid argument, because it’s theoretically possible that a fair coin could come up heads 100 times in a row. But unlike the stimulus, (A) doesn’t make a prediction about the future based on an erroneous understanding of averages.
If there are ██ █████ ████ ███████ ██ █ ██████ ███ ██████ ██ ██ ███████ █████ ████ ██████ █████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ██ █ ██ ███ █████ ██ ██ █████ ████ ██████ ███ ████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ████ ██ █████ ███ ███ █████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ██ ███ ██████ ████ █ ██ ███
Adult male baboons in a group of 10 have an average chance of 1 in 10 of ascending to dominance. Like the stimulus, the author uses an average to make a prediction about an individual: if a baboon hasn’t ascended in the past 10 years, he’s probably due for dominance. But that’s a misunderstanding of averages. Maybe one baboon has a 91% chance of ascending to dominance and the 9 other baboons each have a 1% chance—the average chance is still 1 in 10, but you’d want to put your money on the 91% baboon!
On a given ████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████ ████████ ██ █ ███████ ████████ ██ █ ███████ ████ ██ █ ██ ███████ ██████████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ █ ██████████ █████████ █████ ████████ ██ █ ███████ ████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ██ ████ █ ██ ███████
Wrong flaw. This isn’t a valid argument, because we don’t know much about Marty—maybe he’s a reckless tricycle rider with a higher than average chance of being in a traffic accident, or maybe he never leaves the house and has a 0% chance! Regardless, (C) doesn’t commit the same flaw as the stimulus, which assumes that it’s possible to combine historical data about an individual with average statistics about a group to make predictions about the individual’s future.
The average adolescent ███ █████ █████████ ██ █ ███████ ███████ █████ █████ ██ █████ ███ █████ ██████ ████ ██ █████ ███ █████ █████████ █████ ██████ ██████████ █████ ██ ████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██████████ ███ █████ █████████ █████ ████ ████ ███ ███████ ██████████ ███ █████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ██████████ ███ █████ █████████ █████ ████ ████ ██ █████ ███ █████ ██████ ████ ██ ██ ████████ ██████
No flaw. This is a valid argument! If the average adolescent who works full-time makes around 76 cents for every dollar a fully employed adult makes, and the average adolescent who works part-time makes less than the average adolescent who works full-time, then the average adolescent who works part-time must make less than the average employed adult (assuming that the adult’s employment is full-time).
Though until recently ████ █████ ███████████ ███ █████████ ██ ███████ ████ █ ████ ████ █ ████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ████ █ ████ ████ █ ██ ███████ ██ ███ █████ █████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ██ ███ ███████ ███████████ ██ ██ ██ ███████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██ ████ █ ████ ████ ██
Wrong flaw. While we can’t validly conclude that the grandmaster will maintain the same likelihood he has been exhibiting of responding to move X with move Y, (D) doesn’t commit the same flaw as the stimulus, which assumes that it’s possible to combine historical data about an individual with average statistics about a group to make predictions about the individual’s future.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnosticWant to know why the right answer is right?
7Sage membership unlocks explanations of every question. Every answer choice. On every official PrepTest. Start with a free account.
By signing up you agree to our
terms of service.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Service
apply.