Logical Reasoning

PT144 · S3 · Q20 Advertisement: In a recent survey

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

Advertisement: In a recent survey, a sample representative of all new Popelka Auto Insurance policyholders reported savings of $250 a year, on average, as a result of switching their auto insurance coverage to Popelka.

Conclusion

Most people who aren't already insured by Popelka would save hundreds of dollars by switching.

Evidence

In a representative survey, people who have switched to Popelka have saved, on average, hundreds of dollars ($250 / year).

Evaluate

This is a Comparison argument, and we're saying .

In order for this argument to work, we have to assume that X's and Y's are relevantly similar. To object to a Comparison argument, we we'd want to think

What could be different between people who switched to Popelka and people who haven't yet switched to Popelka?

It's almost like if you heard this argument: in a large representative survey of people who switched to become Android users reported being happier with their phone. Thus, most people who aren't already on an Android would be happier if they switched.

We might object that the important difference between the people who switched to Android and those who haven't, is that the former likes Android phones! Maybe the ones who haven't switched, haven't done so because they have made an accurate comparison between iPhone and Android and prefer, for their needs and tastes, the iPhone.

If you survey the people who have switched, it's a self-selecting sample of Android enthusiasts. Similarly, if you survey the people who have saved $250 by switching, you're surveying a self-selecting sample of people who had the most motivation to switch to Popelka. Because they found out they could save $250, they switched. What saved them money might not save other customers money. Maybe they own a motorcycle and a mobile home and for some reason they make out much more cheaply with Popelka, whereas the average consumer would not save much money.

Goal

Look for an answer highlighting a potential difference between People who have already switched to Popelka and People who haven't switched.

Our objection should help us argue that

20.

The argument in the advertisement is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?

It overlooks the possibility that
Too Weak / No Impact
When a Flaw answer begins with Fails to consider / Overlooks the possibility, we're evaluating whether it's feeding us a good objection (a good Weaken idea). You almost never get correct Weaken ideas with weak-sauce language like "at least some", which means "at least one customer said they saved little or no money". Since we're dealing with an average, we're not concerned when there are data points that don't match the average. They don't have to all match. That's not what average means. However, if this answer said that most of the people who switched didn't save hundreds, that actually would Weaken. The author's conclusion is saying "most people who switch would save hundreds" is assuming that in the survey "most people who switched saved hundreds". But in reality, we only know the average savings was hundreds. That could be the result of most people saving nothing and a small minority saving thousands. That would definitely weaken the conclusion.
11% picked this
It takes for granted that
Irrelevant Comparison
Do we care whether new Popelka users pay more or less than long-time users? No, because the argument is just comparing new Popelka users to non-Popelka users. The author isn't assuming anything about long-time Popelka users.
6% picked this
It fails to address adequately
No Impact
The author's conclusion doesn't promise that "if you switch to Popelka, you'll be getting the best deal in town!" It just says "most people would save hundreds". So if there's some 3rd company that many people would save thousands by switching to, fine. That wouldn't make the author's conclusion any less true. If most people would save hundreds, his argument wins. It's also useful to remember that the conclusion is about "most people" saving hundreds by switching. That leaves room for plenty of exceptions. "Many people" might have to pay much more by switching, and the conclusion might still be true.
11% picked this
It takes for granted that
Opposite: underestimated
This could be a valid assumption if we said overestimated. If most people in the survey overestimated how much they were paying, (they said $250/yr, but it's really like $80/yr), then the author's conclusion would be badly weakened. He would then have to concede that most people who switched would only save around $80. So this argument does need to assume that the survey doesn't give an artificially high average savings. But if we negated this answer, to test whether it is an Assumption, we'd be saying "actually, a sizable number of people surveyed underestimated how much they save. In reality, they save more than $250 / yr." That would help the author's conclusion. When we negate an actual Assumption, it hurts the author's conclusion.
2% picked this
Correct
It fails to address adequately
Why this is right
This gets at the self-selecting Sampling flaw. Maybe motorcyclists save hundreds by getting insured by Popelka, whereas normal car drivers don't save much. In this case, a survey of new Popelka users would be full of motorcyclists who were motivated to switch to Popelka. There wouldn't be that many car drivers, because the fact that they don't save much money by switching means they don't have an incentive to switch.
Skill tested: Flaw · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
71% 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