Although most of the recent responses have good points, much of them bring up the 20 year range within the stimulus as an indicator towards correlation rather than coincidental. I find myself in agreement with JY on this stimulus being a coincidental occurrence because, in this case, the time frame was not to say that there were previous patterns of sales at 1% or less. Arguably, we were not given almost any information on the case that before 20 years ago how significantly low the sales were. We are only given a snippet of an instance between a sale resurgence and an increase on favorable reviews. Here's my reasoning:

(1) Take a look at the introduction, "Although tales of wonder and the fantastic are integral to all world literature, Only recently has the fantasy genre had a commercial resurgence in North America."

Normally, I find Correlations having a previous pattern before introducing the phenomenon. Take PrepTest No. 33, Section 3,Question 07 as an example. The stimulus begins with a previous and subsequent pattern to show a correlation, "Unlike newspapers in the old days, today's newspapers..." The introduction alone prefaces a previous pattern that conflicts with the subsequent phenomenon, "[today's] televised news programs are full of stories about murders and assaults...one can only conclude [Hypothesis]." Now, reverting back to this stimulus, we are not given a previous conflicting pattern such as PrepTest No. 33 Q7. Our stimulus emphasizes this phenomenon happening at the same time. It's not necessarily being compared to a previous time such as how PrepTest No. 33 lends itself.

(2) The answer choice is a denial against the support of the hypothesis -- the idea that favorable book reviews of the fantasy genre caused the sales to increase from 1-10%. The answer to this stimulus is a competing explanation, that it isn't the case that book reviews are tools to purchase books, and these types of answer choices can normally be found with coincidental occurrences. We find JY explaining this in further detail of how answer choice (a.) attacks the support; but, you can see this same action happen from PrepTest 31, Section 3, Question 9. It's similar to this stimulus as the only pattern you see is the phenomenon that happens only during a specific time and place, and the answer choice is a denial of the hypothesis.

If you're thinking that the general population of students have scored higher than the 140s, you're wrong. Most of us have scored low, and it's OK. We all have different ways of learning, so think of the LSAT as that---you're learning a new language. In approaching a new language, it may take some of us couple of months, a year, or more. In this case, I'm sure you just have a couple of LSAT question types that you have yet to get a good handle on; so, one thing can be said here, you need to reevaluate your errors. You should analyze your errors each time you've completed your practice exam, even if it means taking the whole day. You may have trouble understanding the question, the stimulus, or pressured by the time proctor. All three can make a good recipe for anxiety, but nonetheless can be managed. Make a schedule to reevaluate the course with your incorrect answers, and DRILL. You see your progress from practicing, and it really is just that. Remember,everyone feels like giving up when there's a stump in the way, and it's because a lot of us are not accustomed to this style of learning. Make a schedule dedicating at least a couple days for reevaluation, try to find patterns in these LSAT questions, and take breaks. I'll say this again, take a break. You may be feeling down from studying way too much, and we forget that sometimes our brains need to breath too. Change your mindset to taking down the LSAT, and you'll feel an immense difference when taking the exam again. Keep your head up, you're doing better each day.