medium · GMAT Verbal
A newspaper editor argues: "Our investigative reporting team published twice as many stories this year as last year, and our subscription renewals increased 8% this year. Clearly, publishing more investigative stories is what drove the increase in renewals, so we should double the size of the investigative team again next year."
Which of the following identifies the clearest flaw in the editor's reasoning?
- The argument does not specify exactly how many investigative stories were published in either year.
- The argument treats a same-year correlation as proof of causation, ignoring other factors.
- The argument assumes readers are aware of how many investigative stories the paper publishes.
- The argument does not compare the newspaper's renewal rate to that of any competing newspaper.
- The argument fails to define what qualifies as an "investigative" story.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More GMAT Verbal practice
- What logical role do the first two statements play?
- Which of the following is the conclusion?
- A gardener says: 'All roses in this garden require daily wat… — What is the role of the st
- What is the conclusion?
- What is the conclusion?
- Which statement is the conclusion?
- What is the conclusion?
- What logical role does the first sentence play in the researcher's argument?