Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT120 S4 Q10 Explanation

Researcher: All defects in short-term

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsFlaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Researcher: All defects in short-term memory are caused by a malfunction of a part of the brain called the hippocampus. In short-term memory, the mind holds a piece of information for only a few moments, after which it is either stored in long-term memory or forgotten. Learning is the a child exhibits a learning deficit, the hippocampus is malfunctioning.

What this question is testing

Flaw

Your task

Describe the reasoning error the argument actually commits.

Common trap

Answers that name a real logical flaw the argument doesn't actually make.

Winning move

Articulate the gap in the reasoning yourself, then match it to the choice that describes that gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
10.

The reasoning in the researcher’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds

Answer choices

  1. Bad Evidence Match2% picked this

    draws a general conclusion based on too small a sample of

    Does the author draw a general conclusion? Yes, "Whenever a child has a learning deficit ...". Is the author's evidence a limited sampling of learning deficits? No, it's a discussion about short term memory and the hippocampus.

  2. Correct84% picked this

    presumes, without giving justification, that all learning deficits in children involve

    Why this is right

    Conditionally, this answer looks like, "If learning deficit ? bad short term memory" Does it feel fair to say the author's argument is making that move? Yes, since the conclusion says, "if learning deficit ? bad hippocampus", and we know from the author's evidence that, "bad short term memory ? bad hippocampus". If we combine the author's assumption with her evidence, we see where she derived her conclusion. "learning deficit ? bad short ? bad hippo" Pushing back against this assumption is the same as making our objection, "Couldn't there be other sources of a learning deficit besides this one short term memory / hippocampus story you're telling?"

    Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

  3. Backwards Logic10% picked this

    presumes, without giving justification, that short-term memory is disabled whenever the

    The author said "defective short term ? defective hippo" and this answer accuses him of thinking, "defective hippo ? defective short term"

  4. Never a Flaw1% picked this

    fails to quantify precisely the length of time during which the mind holds a piece of

    This is a reasoning test, not a science or math test. We never need precise times, weights, measurements. We don't even need precise definitions of terms, as long as they given us some definition of terms.

  5. Out of Scope: adults vs. kids2% picked this

    takes for granted that learning deficits in adults have a cause unrelated to the cause of

    The conclusion is just about kids. We don't care in analyzing this argument what's going on with adults.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free