Identifying Logical Fallacies Flashcards
6 cards from real HSRT practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 6 Identifying Logical Fallacies flashcards as text
A health product manufacturer claims: 'Our probiotic is natural, therefore it is safe.' Which fallacy does this commit?
Answer: Appeal to nature — the assumption that natural origin implies safety is logically unfounded
Many naturally occurring substances (arsenic, botulinum toxin, amanita mushrooms) are lethal. Natural origin does not imply safety.
A pharmacist hears: 'All the best cardiologists at this hospital recommend Drug Z, so it must be the best option.' The BEST identification of this argument's flaw is:
Answer: Bandwagon fallacy — consensus among a selected group does not substitute for systematic evidence review
The bandwagon fallacy argues that because many or prominent people agree, a claim must be correct — but popularity among experts is not equivalent to systematic evidence.
A clinical nurse specialist argues: 'We should implement hourly rounding. Studies show it reduces fall rates. If you don't support this, you clearly don't care about patient safety.' Which fallacy is present?
Answer: Appeal to emotion (false dichotomy embedded) — framing opposition as moral failure rather than engaging the legitimate concerns
Implying that disagreement with a policy means not caring about safety is an appeal to emotion that bypasses legitimate concerns about workload, evidence quality, and implementation.
A clinical researcher states: 'We gave patients garlic supplements and their blood pressure improved. The garlic must have caused the improvement.' Without a control group, this reasoning commits which fallacy?
Answer: Post hoc ergo propter hoc — assuming causation from temporal sequence without controlling for confounders
Without a control group, improvement may be due to regression to the mean, natural disease course, or placebo effect — not the garlic supplement.
During a hospital ethics consultation, a physician argues: 'Dr. Chen recommended DNR status, but she has financial conflicts of interest.' This implies her recommendation should be dismissed. Which fallacy applies?
Answer: Circumstantial ad hominem — attacking the circumstances of the person to dismiss their argument rather than addressing its merits
Dismissing an argument based on the speaker's personal circumstances (financial interest) without addressing the argument's substance is circumstantial ad hominem.
A hospital administrator says: 'Our new EHR reduced nursing documentation time from 45 minutes to 30 minutes. Clearly it has improved all aspects of nursing care.' Which fallacy is committed?
Answer: Overgeneralization — extrapolating a single measured benefit (documentation time) to all aspects of nursing care
Extrapolating one measured metric (documentation time) to all dimensions of nursing care quality is an overgeneralization.