Final answer:
The term that describes the oversimplification fallacy when a speaker uses insufficient evidence to support a conclusion is called hasty generalization. It is a common example of a fallacy of weak induction.
Step-by-step explanation:
The fallacy that refers to an oversimplification that occurs when a speaker argues from insufficient evidence or ignores relevant evidence is known as hasty generalization. This fallacy of weak induction involves drawing a conclusion from too little evidence to support the conclusion. An example of a hasty generalization would be observing that two students from a specific class were nervous before a test and concluding that all students in that class must have test anxiety, which is inadequate to support such a broad claim.
Here's a brief comparison of the other options provided:
Ad hominem is a fallacy that attempts to discredit a person rather than an argument.
Strawman involves misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack.
Cherry-picking is selecting evidence that supports one's argument while ignoring contrary evidence.