Passage Summary: Almost all kids know what cigarette logos look like, but hardly any of those kids actually smoke, so the author concludes that seeing the logos doesn't influence whether someone smokes.

Conclusion: There is little or no connection between recognizing cigarette brand logos and the act of smoking.

Reasoning: While most nine-year-olds can identify cigarette logos, less than one percent of those children actually smoke.

Analysis: The flaw here is a failure to consider the long-term effects of a cause. The author assumes that because the 'effect' (smoking) hasn't happened yet in this specific young group, the 'cause' (logo recognition) has no impact. To parallel this, look for an argument that dismisses a relationship between two things simply because the result hasn't shown up in a population that is likely too young or too early in the process to show it. It's like saying 'learning to read doesn't lead to finishing novels because most five-year-olds who know their ABCs haven't read War and Peace yet.'