Q1 - While it might be expected

[sloan_galler]

Love this forum!

Slowly increasing my accuracy on LR. Been a slippery slope to climb.

For the most part, I find I eliminate 3/5 answer choices (POE method) and about 4-5X I pick the wrong answer choice out of the two ...

For this Q: It is quite obvious that A B and E can be eliminated ... Leaving C and D

I chose C, in part because it was a flaw in other LR questions. I very well understand why D is correct, but rather do not understand why C is incorrect ...

Thank you in advance

[giladedelman]

Thanks for the forum love!

Now please repeat after me:

I WILL NOT CHOOSE AN ANSWER JUST BECAUSE I'VE SEEN IT WORK BEFORE.

I WILL NOT CHOOSE AN ANSWER JUST BECAUSE I'VE SEEN IT WORK BEFORE.

I WILL NOT CHOOSE AN ANSWER JUST BECAUSE I'VE SEEN IT WORK BEFORE.

All right. You with me? Great.

This argument concludes that police presence doesn't decrease crime, on the basis that the most-patrolled neighborhoods have the most crime. But what if it's the crime rates that motivates the increased police presence? Maybe the crime rates would be even higher if there weren't so many cops on the beat. The argument assumes that this isn't the case.

(D) is correct because it identifies this oversight.

(C) is incorrect because there is absolutely no indication that the data sample is too small. In fact, the argument says that "the statistical evidence overwhelmingly supports the claim that such neighborhoods have the most crime." That's about the furthest thing from having too small a sample size.

Does that make sense?

[ericha3535]

I might be splitting hairs... but
I feel like the answer choice is saying something like
"the argument has failed to consider that the causal relationship in the stimulus is reverse..."
in other words, the argument says: police -> crime
the answer choice says: crime -> police

But this type of answer choice is so drastically different from my prephrase answer choice I anticipated that... I don't know how it exactly pin points out the flaw...

(my prehrease answer choice was the argument has failed to consider that if the police wasn't there, the crime rate would have gone up or something)
Could someone help me?