medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A university representative stated: 'The average starting salary for our graduates has risen 15 percent since we revamped our career services program. Thus most of our recent graduates are now earning more than graduates did before the revamp.'
Which one of the following is the most accurate criticism of the representative's reasoning?
- It overlooks that a few graduates with exceptionally high salaries could lift the average even while most graduates earn no more than before
- It takes for granted that the school's revamped career services program was the sole influence on the graduates' rising starting salaries
- It does not report the specific dollar figures that lie behind the salary averages the representative cites as evidence for the conclusion
- It fails to adjust the reported starting salaries for the steadily eroding effect that inflation has on real purchasing power over time
- It assumes that a graduate's higher starting salary necessarily guarantees a correspondingly higher salary throughout that graduate's career
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