LSAT 154 – Section 4 – Question 19

LSAT 154 - Section 4 - Question 19

September 2017

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 0:47

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT154 S4 Q19
+LR
Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Sampling +Smpl
A
3%
155
B
6%
158
C
8%
155
D
76%
165
E
7%
155
145
153
161
 +Harder 147.301 +SubsectionMedium

Store owner: My customers are not worried about crime in this neighborhood; every day I talk to people who shop at my store, and they tell me that they are not worried. So crime is not adversely affecting my business by reducing the number of people willing to shop at my store.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that crime isn’t adversely affecting his business by reducing the number of people willing to shop at his store. He supports this main conclusion with the subsidiary conclusion that his customers aren’t worried about crime in the neighborhood. This sub-conclusion is supported by the fact that people he talks to in his store say that they’re not worried about crime.

Identify and Describe Flaw
The author overlooks the fact that the people in his store who aren’t worried about crime might not be representative of the people who might want to shop at the store. Other people who aren’t shopping at the store might be worried about crime.

A
infers that something is not the case on the grounds that there is only a small amount of evidence for its being the case
The conclusion is not based on a claim that there’s only a small amount of evidence that crime is reducing the number of people willing to shop at the store. The conclusion is based on the conversations the author has had with people who say they aren’t worried about crime.
B
appeals to personal opinion to establish a factual claim
There’s nothing flawed about relying on what people say about their fear of crime to establish whether those people are afraid of crime. This isn’t a case of using personal opinion inappropriately to establish a factual matter.
C
generalizes about the whole neighborhood based on the case of one store
The conclusion is just about the author’s store. It’s not about the whole neighborhood.
D
draws a conclusion on the basis of a biased sample
The conclusion is based on the sample of people who shop at his store. They are not necessarily representative of people generally. People who aren’t shopping at the store might be too afraid to shop there, whereas the people who do shop there are the ones who aren’t afraid.
E
fails to consider that crime might affect the neighborhood negatively without affecting businesses negatively
The conclusion is just about whether crime is reducing the number of people shopping at the store. Whether the neighborhood is affected in other weighs is irrelevant.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 154 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply