easy · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The average salary earned by graduates of University X is higher than the average salary earned by graduates of University Y. Sarah concludes that she personally will earn more if she attends University X rather than University Y.
Which one of the following identifies the logical flaw in Sarah's reasoning?
- She assumes that University X enjoys a substantially greater overall reputation and prestige than University Y does.
- She treats a figure describing a group as though it dictated the outcome for each individual member of that group.
- She fails to weigh the considerable difference in yearly tuition costs between the two universities she names.
- She overlooks the possibility that University Y has produced a far larger number of total graduates than X has.
- She assumes that the salary advantage of University X graduates is certain to grow even larger over time.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ