Logical Reasoning

PT135 · S4 · Q17 Watching music videos from the 1970s

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

Watching music videos from the 1970s would give the viewer the impression that the music of the time was dominated by synthesizer pop and punk rock.

Conclusion

It would be wrong to conclude from 1970s music videos that the music of that era was dominated by synth pop and punk (i.e. the music of that era was not dominated by synth pop and punk)

Evidence

Music videos were such a new art form, that the types of musicians most likely to be in music videos were a skewed sample of "cutting-edge" musicians.

Evaluate

The author is saying that we shouldn't extrapolate a generalization about 1970s music from 1970s music videos, because the music that appeared in 1970s music videos is not a representative sample.

Goal

Conclusion: It would be misleading to look at the X's involved in Y and conclude something broadly about X's. Premise: The X's involved in Y are a skewed sample of X's.

17.

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

Our view of pre-printing-press literature
Weak Conclusion Match
This does have a premise that sounds like an unrepresentative sample (surviving works aren't a random sample / they're ones that skew towards being interesting). But the conclusion is saying "our view can never be accurate", rather than something more similar like "It would be misleading to infer from surviving works of ancient authors than ancient literature was predominantly interesting".
10% picked this
Our memory of 1960s TV
Bad Conclusion / Premise Match
The conclusion is talking about us having the correct impression, so I would probably stop reading there. There is a sample presented in the evidence, but the sample of shows that still rerun isn't indicated to be unrepresentative. If anything, it's indicated to be representative because "so many of them" still run.
1% picked this
Correct
Future generations' understanding of today's
Why this is right
If you were to look at works published in CD-ROM and try to generalize about published works during this time period, you'd get a misleading impression, since the works published in CD-ROM format are an atypical sample (primarily computer games materials). Like the original, this presents an atypical sample and warns us against the misleading inference we would be making were we to extrapolate a generalization from that sample.
Skill tested: Parallel · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
82% picked this
Our understanding of silent films
Weak Conclusion Match Bad Premise Match
The conclusion is talking about our impression being incomplete, which is very different from misleading. And the premise doesn't point to an atypical, skewed sample. It just explains why we've lost so many data points. It doesn't characterize the surviving data points as belonging primarily to some atypical group.
4% picked this
Our notion of fashion trends
Bad Conclusion Match
This presents an unrepresentative sample (TV fashion is skewed towards more outrageous outfits than normal), but then concludes the opposite of the original argument. Instead of saying, "So you'd get a misleading impression of current fashion if you based it off of TV fashion programs", it concluded "so you'll get an accurate impression".
3% 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