As an eighth grader, Barbara Kingsolver reasoned that "everyone with an iota of social position wore polka-dot shirts and miniskirts" in "Life Without Go-Go Boots." Which best describes the way in which this reasoning is flawed? It draws a conclusion about a population based on a small sample. It reflects the claim of an assumed authority. It justifies a wrong with another wrong It uses irrelevant evidence to reach a conclusion.

Faulty or flawed reasoning occurs when there are issues in the process of concluding something based on a premise or previous statement which lead to lack of support of the conclusion or incorrect reasoning. In the case of the statement "everyone with an iota of social position wore polka-dot shirts and miniskirts" flawed reasoning occurs because the speaker or author of this statement is assuming people with certain characteristics (iota of social position) will were certain clots (polka-dot shorts and miniskirts) which is likely to be false as not everyone with this feature would use the same clothes and but the author of this it is wrongly assuming this and creating a conclusion probably on a few people the author saw with both features. Therefore,e the way this reasoning is flawed is because it draws a conclusion about a population based on a small sample.