Cause Effect and Post Hoc – UGC NET Question

The post hoc fallacy occurs when someone assumes that because one event happens after another, the first event must have caused the second. Here, improvement in performance follows the introduction of a new method, and causation is asserted purely based on this sequence. The reasoning ignores other possible factors such as increased practice, changes in assessment or better resources. This unwarranted leap from temporal order to causal claim is exactly what the Latin label “post hoc ergo propter hoc” names.

Option A:
Option A, slippery slope, suggests a chain reaction of events leading to extreme consequences, which is not the pattern here.

Option B:
Option B identifies the specific error of inferring causation only from the fact that one event came after another, matching the structure of the argument given.

Option C:
Option C, hasty generalisation, involves drawing a broad conclusion from too few or unrepresentative cases, which is related but distinct from post hoc reasoning.

Option D:
Option D, false analogy, rests on inappropriate comparison between two cases, which is not central to this example.