Which logical fallacy is illustrated when personal experiences are generalized to justify a broad statement about a group?

The scenario described in the question highlights the hasty generalization fallacy, which occurs when an individual draws a broad conclusion based on a limited set of experiences or evidence. This fallacy happens when someone uses their personal experiences as the sole basis for making general assumptions about an entire group. For example, if someone had a single negative encounter with a person from a specific group and then concludes that all members of that group share similar negative traits, they are committing a hasty generalization. This reasoning lacks sufficient support and does not consider the broader reality of the entire group, leading to potentially erroneous conclusions.

Other types of fallacies listed, such as concurrency, faulty analogy, and non sequitur, address different reasoning errors and do not specifically pertain to the act of generalizing based on personal experiences. Concurrency relates more to the simultaneous occurrence of events rather than broad conclusions from limited data. Faulty analogy involves drawing misleading comparisons between two unrelated things, and non sequitur denotes arguments where the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. Thus, hasty generalization is the most accurate term for the fallacy illustrated in this context.