Restaurant manager: In response to requests from our patrons for vegetarian main dishes, we recently introduced three: an eggplant and zucchini casserole with tomatoes, brown rice with mushrooms, and potatoes baked with cheese.
Conclusion (clearly, then)
Our patrons prefer not to eat potatoes.
Evidence
We recently introduced three vegetarian entrees: - eggplant and zucchini casserole w/ tomatoes - brown rice with mushrooms - potatoes baked with cheese
The first two are frequently ordered, but no one orders the potato dish, even though it costs less than the other two.
Evaluate
The evidence introduces an Asymmetric Comparison, also known as a Curious Fact. The author's conclusion is overconfident in assigning a causal explanation for that curious fact.
Curious Fact ... how come people aren't ordering the potatoes and cheese dish?
Author's Explanation ... people don't like potatoes.
Maybe that is the reason, but maybe not. Maybe there's an Alternate Explanation, such as .
Goal
On Flaw, when an author overconfidently concludes or assumes the causal explanation for some funky piece of evidence, the test usually just wants us to acknowledge that the author is too sure of one possible explanation.
And the correct answer is usually worded in a way that sounds like the author is "failing to consider Alternative Explanations".