Flawed ReasoningDiff: Medium

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: People who check nutrition labels eat less fat, so the author concludes that the act of reading the labels is what makes them eat better.

Conclusion: Reading nutrition labels causes people to adopt healthier dietary habits.

Reasoning: There is a statistical correlation showing that people who read food labels consume a lower percentage of fat calories than those who do not.

Analysis: This is a classic case of confusing correlation with causation. The author observes two things happening together—label reading and low-fat diets—and assumes the first causes the second. However, it is just as likely that people who are already health-conscious are the ones who bother to read labels in the first place. Look for an answer that points out the failure to consider that a third factor might be responsible for both behaviors.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

8.

The reasoning in the argument above is flawed in that the argument

Correct Answer
A
It names the classic error: moving from a correlation (label readers have lower fat intake) to a causal claim (reading labels promotes healthier eating) without eliminating alternative causes or reverse causation.
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep