Don’t lose your progress!

We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.

Up to 90+ points GMAT score improvement guarantee

The best guarantee you’ll find

Our Premium and Ultimate plans guarantee up to 90+ points score increase or your money back.

Master each section of the test

Comprehensive GMAT prep

We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.

Schedule-free studying

Learn on the go

Study whenever and wherever you want with our iOS and Android mobile apps.

The most effective way to study

Personalized GMAT prep, just for you!

Adaptive learning technology focuses on your academic weaknesses.

Critical Reasoning: Argument Flaw Questions

A recent poll showed that 96% of the country's animal owners were strongly against the placing of taxes on animal owning. The revenues collected from such a tax would be used to improve the health conditions of rescued animals. Therefore, the results of the final vote showing that 68% of the population are in favor of taxes for the owning of animals must have been incorrectly calculated or manipulated.

A major flaw in the argument above is that



As long as the conclusion can be logically supported by premises, an argument cannot be deemed flawed because it supports a certain position that it has described. On the contrary - an argument most often promotes some sort of position!



The second premise clearly states that the revenues from the taxes are intended to help rescued animals. Therefore, the statement in this answer choice is inaccurate since this information is not assumed, but purely factual.



The argument is claiming the results are incorrect, and offers two possible explanations for this discrepancy - mistake or deceit. The author does not claim deceit is necessarily the correct explanation and therefore is not required to present evidence to support such a claim.



This answer choice is incorect since the personal opinions of the animal owners are definitely taken into account - they are represented by the poll mentioned in the first premise and as a part of the objecting votes in the general vote described in premise C.

Terrific work!


The strong opposition (96% against) among animal owners can be explained by their bias - the fact that they would be the one to pay the tax. Therefore, they cannot serve as a suitable sample group of citizens, and a similar opposition cannot be expected in the greater population.

it mistakenly claims that the opinion of a biased sample group reflects that of a larger group
it clearly shows support for one of the positions it describes
the author makes an assumption about the intended use of revenues from the tax
it does not provide any actual evidence of ill intentions or deceit
the personal opinions of people who own animals are not taken into account