Let's first be sure we understand the stimulus. It presents an argument, the conclusion of which is that Joan and her friends must have a defect in their sense of smell. Why? The given premises are that (1) Professor Jameson prefers the smell of Aurora to that of any other perfume and (2) she is one of the world's foremost experts on the physiology of smell.
This is not a logically sound argument. Physiology refers to biological mechanisms. This means that an expert in the physiology of smell is someone who could tell you about the biological workings of the sense of smell.
This does not, obviously, make Professor Jameson's personal preferences with respect to a particular perfume dispositive. Yet this is exactly what the stimulus posits.
The question stem asks you to articulate the flaw in the reasoning. The argument is flawed because it (D) makes an illegitimate appeal to the authority of an expert.
Answer choice (B) does not describe the logical flaw *in play in this particular argument.* The issue is not that we do not know how much Professor Jameson likes the perfume Aurora. Rather, the issue is that the stimulus's appeal to Professor Jameson's expertise in physiology is not a legitimate basis for its conclusion that Joan and her friends must have defective senses of smell, just because Professor Jameson prefers Aurora over all other perfumes.
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
