Overgeneralization
P2A specific claim is extended to a wider population, or an inference direction is reversed.
Understanding this concept
Distractor pattern P2. The passage says "children of anxious mothers have twice the ADHD risk." The distractor says "most children with ADHD have anxious mothers." This reverses the inference direction — the passage talks about a subset of children (those with anxious mothers) but the distractor talks about a different subset (children with ADHD). Always check: does the distractor expand the scope or flip the direction?
How to defend against it
- Check the scope: does the statement talk about the same group as the passage?
- Watch for direction reversals: "A affects B" ≠ "B is caused by A"
- Specific → general jumps are almost always wrong: one case ≠ a rule
- If the passage discusses a subset, the answer cannot claim the whole set
Example
Passage: "Research shows that regular exercise reduces cardiovascular risk by 20%." Trap: "A 20% reduction in cardiovascular disease is primarily due to exercise." The passage says exercise helps; the trap says exercise is the primary factor.