Mismatched premises and conclusion. The stimulus says that one trait is not necessarily indicative of another, but (A) focuses on weighing the positive and negative aspects of a certain choice (a job).

The conclusion of (A) warns that making a decision for one positive aspect may mean accepting a negative aspect. The stimulus does not involve weighing pros and cons.

Mismatched premises and conclusion. The stimulus operates by advising people not to confuse one trait (reputation) for another trait (quality); (B) does not involve this aspect of confusing one thing for another. (B) concludes by warning that certain positive reactions may be dishonest. The stimulus is about confusing one thing for another, not about something being dishonest.

Mismatched conclusion. The stimulus concludes by saying that one trait is not necessarily indicative of another; (C) concludes by describing a certain condition (learning to enjoy the process) that makes a certain outcome (learning a skill) more likely.

The argument operates by advising readers that a superficially positive trait (charm) is not necessarily indicative of another positive trait (virtue as a friend).

Mismatched premises. (E) is missing the aspect of confusing one trait for another. Instead, (E) talks about a scenario in which a certain desire (yearning to preform) takes the enjoyment out of an activity (watching a play).