Logical Reasoning

PT131 · S1 · Q4 Advertisement: Seventy-five percent of dermatologists

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

  • 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

Advertisement: Seventy-five percent of dermatologists surveyed prefer Dermactin to all other brands of skin cream.

Evidence

Seventy-five percent of dermatologists surveyed prefer Dermactin to all other brands of skin cream. We consulted dermatologists during the development of Dermactin to ensure that you have the best skin cream on the market.

Conclusion (so)

If you need a skin cream, use Dermactin.

Evaluate

It's pretty compelling to hear that 3/4 of dermatologists prefer Dermactin to all other brands of skin cream.

So if we're hoping to argue that skin-cream users should NOT use Dermactin, we'd either need to argue

- even though most dermatologists pick it as the best, it's not realistic for lots of people (too expensive? interacts poorly with other commonly used body products?)

or

- this survey was biased / self-selecting / too small, or something else that would cheapen its value as evidence

4.

The reasoning in the advertisement is questionable because the advertisement

  1. overlooks the possibility that other

    Out of Scope - Opposite Group

    Doctors who are not dermatologists are not relevant to the argument since the conclusion is narrowly drawn around those who need a skin cream.

    6% picked this

  2. Correct

    fails to state the number

    Why this is right

    This points out the possibility that the dermatologists surveyed held more positive views about Dermactin than dermatologists more generally.

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

    85% picked this

  3. presumes, without providing justification, that

    Contradiction

    The argument assumes that all dermatologists are equally qualified to evaluate skin cream.

    2% picked this

  4. relies on an inappropriate appeal

    Contradiction

    The appeal was to the opinion of dermatologists, not consumers.

    4% picked this

  5. overlooks the possibility that for

    Out of Scope - Opposite Group

    The argument is about people who need skin cream. People who do not need skin cream are not relevant to the argument.

    2% picked this

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