Logical Reasoning

PT133 · S1 · Q24 In university towns

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

In university towns, police issue far more parking citations during the school year than they do during the times when the students are out of town.

Conclusion

Most parking citations in college towns are issued to students.

Evidence

In college towns, police issue more parking citations during the school year than not during the school year.

Evaluation

This is a Curious Fact / Author's Interpretation type argument. curious fact: Why are more parking tickets issued when school is in session? author's story: When school is in session, there are more students around, and the students are the ones getting most of the tickets.

What's the flaw with that type of argument? The flaw with almost all Causal arguments is that the author is too sure of one potential explanation. Maybe there is some other way to explain that data: - maybe there are more parking enforcement officers during the school year - maybe there are just more people in general (not just students) during the school year

Goal

The form of this argument is a loose sense of Correlation → Causation.

If we assume that more students are around when school is in session, the author sees a correlation: Students In Town || More Tickets

and then she draws a causal inference that the students being there are the cause of more tickets.

Look for a similar

24.

Which one of the following is most similar in its flawed reasoning to the flawed reasoning in the argument above?

  1. We know that children buy

    Weak Conclusion Match

    This isn't too bad. There is a correlation: more kids, relative to adults || popcorn But the conclusion should say, "So apparently kids are buying most of the popcorn". Instead it introduces an additional flaw of going from "popcorn" to "snacks".

    21% picked this

  2. We know that this houseplant

    Bad Premise Match

    There's not really a correlation in the evidence. It's just a comparison: this plant is greener than that one.

    1% picked this

  3. We know that most people

    Topic Trap Bad Conclusion Match

    The conclusion isn't causal; it's just describing a trait. This also feels like a relatively valid conclusion to draw. If most of these people study, then it's pretty fair to call most of these people studious. Watch out on Parallel questions for any answer that seems to be a little too close to the Topic of the original. Those are almost always trap answers trying to bait people into picking based on similarity of topic, rather than logic.

    3% picked this

  4. We know that consumers buy

    Bad Conclusion Match

    We could say that the evidence presents us with a correlation: when summer is present there are more varieties of fruit. But then we could need a causal conclusion that sounds like "warmth causes more varieties of fruit". Summer = school year. Since the author was assuming there were more students during school year, this answer would need to be assuming there's more ____ during summer, and that that's what's causing more varieties of fruit. The conclusion doesn't even try to explain more varieties; it just tries to explain more fruit.

    14% picked this

  5. Correct

    We know that most of

    Why this is right

    There's a correlation in the evidence: other kids coming to visit || more snacks Does the author then conclude that one must be the reason for the other? Yes, the argument is saying that most of the snacks are going to those visiting kids. But there are other possible explanations: - maybe parents put out more snacks when visitors are there, but their own kids still eat most of the snacks. In the original argument, this would be similar to objecting: - maybe parking officers give out more tickets when students are in town, but it's still non-students who get most of the tickets.

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

    61% 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