Initially, my anticipation for this question was an unrepresentative sample because it used the term accident in its conclusion and household accident in its premise. Do these questions commonly show multiple flaws, or am I reading too much into it? My anticipation led me closer to answer choice C, since it pointed out that the term accident was used differently (I get that this is equivocal language not unrepresentative, but the two worked together here). I get why B is the correct answer choice, and the flaw is apparent, but I feel confused sometimes when my anticipation points so clearly to something else. Are there tricks to avoiding false assumptions about the passages?
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
It is absolutely possible and in fact quite common for there to be multiple flaws. Here I agree that the two roses you identified are the biggest ones: the passage does slightly shift its frame of reference between all accidents and household accidents, and it uses absolute numbers when comparing percentages.
In terms of trying to find correct answers given the fact that most error/weaken questions will have more than one flaw (or more than one way to articulate the flaw) I would recommend three things.
First, I would try to hunt for additional problems once you have a first flaw. Sometimes the first flaw you see will be so clear, so glaring that it isn't worth the effort but as you practice I think it's a good habit to spend an extra tan seconds trying to think about additional flaws.
Second, I think it may help to keep your understanding of the flaw closer to the passage for now. That is, instead of abstracting your understanding so high like "sample issue" keep it in the terms of the passage, like "shifts from all accidents to household accidents."
Third, keep a relatively open mind in the answer choices.
