GMAT Critical Reasoning Discussions

Can anyone post right answer explanation to below question?

High school students who feel that they are not succeeding in high school often drop out before graduating and go to work. Last year however , the city's high school drop out rate was significantly lower than the previous years rate.The is encouraging evidence that the program instituted two years ago to improve the moral of the high school students has began to take effect to reduce dropouts.

Which of the following , if true about the last year , most seriously weaken the argument?

A. There was a recession that caused high level of unemployment in the city.
- In first look this option seems correct. but even if there is high level of unemployment, we can't assume that high level of unemployment will prevent dropping out of students. i.e. we do not know extent of unemployment.
B. The moral of students who drop out of high school had been low even before they reach high school.
- This should be the correct answer, according to this option, "moral boosting program was not responsible for boosting morale and prevent drop-outs... " (which is an assumption) but the reason was different (i.e. students dropped - out before high school...). hence this option negates the assumption and weakens the argument.
C. As in the preceding year more high school students remained in the school than dropped out.
- does not provide sufficient data. There might be more students admitted in high school hence more students remained.
D. High schools in the city established placement offices to assist graduates in obtaining employment.
- Not relevant. talking about graduates/not drop-outs. out of scope
E.The anti drop out program was primarily aimed at improving students moral in those high schools with high dropout rates.
- does not affect the assumption.

This question is from power score CR bible. I'm always being trapped in shell game answers. and the reason doesn't seem to be convincing why my answers are wrong. does any one know the right answer nd its reason?


My take - B
Assumption - Moral boosting programs were responsible to reduce the drop-out rate (and no other factor was responsible)

Please post OA.


CR Questions

OAs: AEBCB

Question 3: This one's strange:
I recently doubled my salary by taking a new job. I 've been working at a company for two days and now realize that the company 's workers are mean-spirited and egotistical. I have decided that high paying companies have unfriendly employees.
Which of the following, if true, would weaken the above conclusion?

A. The work environment brings out the worst in people.
B. The company has 150,000 employees.
C. Salary is more important than work environment.
D. The benefits of the new job outweigh the unfriendly people.
E. Egotistical workers can often outperform less self-confident employees.


I faced this ques in one of the mocks i gave, i chose A and was quite shocked to see the answer was B!
I'm giving the explanation as it is from what they wrote. Here it is:

(B) If, as the passage states, the narrator spent only a week at a college that has over 50,000 students, how could he or she possibly draw a conclusion about the entire group? This is an example of a conclusion based on an insufficient sample size. For example, you can't take a poll that only asks a few people. Obviously, you can't get to know 150,000 people in two days, which choice B points out. Choices (A), (C), (D), and (E) may or may not be true, but they are not relevant to the validity of the speaker's generalization about the company.

Will give the answer and explanations to other ques in a while after rattling my brain.


Regards,
Neha
Can anyone post right answer explanation to below question?

High school students who feel that they are not succeeding in high school often drop out before graduating and go to work. Last year however , the city's high school drop out rate was significantly lower than the previous years rate.The is encouraging evidence that the program instituted two years ago to improve the moral of the high school students has began to take effect to reduce dropouts.

Which of the following , if true about the last year , most seriously weaken the argument?

A. There was a recession that caused high level of unemployment in the city.
B. The moral of students who drop out of high school had been low even before they reach high school.
C. As in the preceding year more high school students remained in the school than dropped out.
D. High schools in the city established placement offices to assist graduates in obtaining employment.
E.The anti drop out program was primarily aimed at improving students moral in those high schools with high dropout rates.

This question is from power score CR bible. I'm always being trapped in shell game answers. and the reason doesn't seem to be convincing why my answers are wrong. does any one know the right answer nd its reason?


I think the answer is D.
The ques asks which statement weakens the argument.
And what's the argument here OR what are you asked to weaken?
The argument is- the program which instituted two years ago to improve the moral of the high school students is the reason for reduce in the no. of dropouts from the high school. so we have to weaken this, that is find a reason which is valid and shows that this Other thing is the reason for low rates of dropouts.

Now since we are cleared, what we are looking for, let's go through the answer chocies.

Choice A is irrelvant. we aren't looking for the reasons of- why there is high level of umemployment.
Choice B is also irrelevant. it says, the students had low moral even reaching to high school. is this what we are concerned with? NO!

Choice C contradicts the info given in the ques. it says, in the preceding year more high school students remained in the school than dropped out.
And the premesis in the ques clearly says that- Last year however, the city's high school drop out rate was significantly lower than the previous years rate.

Choice E says, The anti drop out program was primarily aimed at improving students moral in those high schools with high dropout rates, this supports the Argument. says that the program insititued is the reason, why there is reduce in the no of dropouts from high school.

Choice D says, High schools in the city established placement offices to assist graduates in obtaining employment, is absolutely correct cause it specifices that High school students are not dropping out but are helping them to graduate and then get employed. and weakens the arguement that why the program insitituted it NOT the reason for reduce in no. of drop outs.


My take - B
Assumption - Moral boosting programs were responsible to reduce the drop-out rate (and no other factor was responsible)

Please post OA.


Yogesh, i think you got the ques wrong.

Ple Nilesh, post the OA.

Hope the reasoning is clear.

Regards,
Neha


CR Ques:

OAs: AEBCB

Question 1:
Dobson: Some historians claim that the people who built a ring of stones thousands of years ago in Britain were knowledgeable about celestial events. The grounds for this claim are that two of the stones determine a line pointing directly to the position of the sun at sunrise at the spring equinox. However, there are many stones in the ring so the chance that one pair will point in a celestially significant direction is high. Therefore, the people who built the ring were not knowledgeable about celestial events.
Which one of the following is an error of reasoning in Dobson's argument?

A. The failure of cited evidence to establish a statement is taken as evidence that that statement is false.
B. Dobson's conclusion logically contradicts some of the evidence presented in support of it.
C. Statements that absolutely establish Dobson's conclusion are treated as if they merely give some support to that conclusion.
D. Something that is merely a matter of opinion is treated as if it were subject to verification as a fact.
E. Dobson is not a scientist.

A is best cause it tells unambiguously what Dobson assumed.
Rest chocies are not correct.


Question 2:
After a week, the body of anyone infected by virus X will produce antibodies to fight the virus. The antibodies will increase in number for the next year or so. There is now a test that reliably indicates how many antibodies are present in a person's body. If positive, this test can be used during the first year of infection to estimate within a month of accuracy when that person became infected by the virus.
Which one of the following conclusions is best supported by the statements above?

A. Antibodies increase in number only until they have defeated the virus.
B. Without the test for antibodies, there is no way of establishing whether a person has virus X.
C. Antibodies are produced only for viral infections that cannot be fought by any other body defenses.
D. If a person remains infected by virus X indefinitely, there is no limit to the number of antibodies that can be present in the person's body.
E. Anyone infected by virus X will fail for a period of time to exhibit infection if tested by the antibody test.

We are concerned about strengthing the statement that the test is able to tell when did the patient got infected by the Virus X

Choice A dosen't tell anything about the test. We are not concerned about increase in no of antibodies and how they get defeated.

Choice B is irrelevant. We are not concernced about is the test able to detect that a person had virus X. the argument nowhere says, that we are testing to check this.

Choice C is irrelevant. Choice C doesn't say anything about the test and talks about the antibodies are produced for what! we arn't concernced about that!

Chocie D too talks rubbish! and says nothing about the test.

Choice E is the best. and strengths that the test is able to detect when a person got infected by Virus X. cause if you are able to detect this then only will you to take action to stop it and treat the patient. and when you do that over a period of time, the infection caused by the virus will fail. this is what Choice E states.



Question 4:
There has been a sharp increase in the subscription prices of many professional and scholarly journals in the past seven years. Many publishers ascribe these increases to the availability of photocopying facilities, which facilitates copying articles in lieu of buying an entire journal.
Which of the following, if true, would best strengthen this explanation?

A. The great majority of professional and scholarly journals have a massive backlog of papers awaiting publication.
B. Over the last three years, there has been a substantial decline in the number of individual subscriptions to professional and scholarly journals, while library subscriptions have remained fairly stable.
C. In the five years immediately preceding the price surge, there was a substantial decline in the number of individual subscriptions to professional and scholarly journals, while library subscriptions remained fairly stable.
D. Many libraries have recently begun cutting back on subscriptions to professional and scholarly journals.
E. In almost every field, several new professional and scholarly journals have begun publication in the past few years.

Choice A and E are irrelevant. We are not looking for how much backlog of papers does the professional and scholarly journals have. or even for in how many fields, how many professionals have started the publications.

Choice B is almost right in telling that the subcriptions of professional journals decreased and library had fairly stable. But it does not tell that is this was after or before the increase in the subcriptions of the Professional and scholarly journals.

Choice D is opposite of what we are looking. it says that people are again subscribing to professional journals. But it's still incomplete, cause doesn't tell before or after the price rise.

Choice C is best in strengthing that after the increase in subscriptions of professional jornals, people have started issuing/copying the journals from lib and the professional subrciptions have decreased.


Question 5:
Over the last 10 years the retail hardware business has seen massive consolidation with many smaller hardware retailers going out of business. These changes have been attributed to the new ' category killer ' stores that have the volume and buying leverage to offer very low prices while maintaining healthy profit margins. This analysis is incorrect, however, because since even today the so-called superstores only have a small share of the total retail hardware market.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument that the analysis is flawed?

A. Most of the larger customers for hardware purchases buy directly from manufacturers and thus do not participate in the retail market.
B. The superstores' heavy advertising of their low prices has forced prices down throughout the retail market for hardware supplies.
C. Many of the ' category killer ' stores have themselves gone out of business.
D. Most of the hardware superstores sell a diversified base of goods, not just hardware.
E. The internet has created new openings for dozens of small internet-based hardware retailers.


Choice C, D are absolutely irrelevant. We aren't looking 'category killers' are out of the business and where did the h/w stores diversified in.
Choice A too is rubbish, we are not looking for from does the large customers buy.
Now, choice E kinda strengths the statement. tells why the superstores have a small share of the retail H/w marekt.

Choice B is best that helps in weakening. It says: The superstores' heavy advertising of their low prices has forced prices down throughout the retail market for hardware supplies. which tells that the superstores do not have small share of the retail H/w market.

Hope the reasoning is clears.

Wish i could reason this well while giving the test:-(
in 75 seconds i'm supposed to choose the right option and it takes me atleast 60 seconds to read the damm ques!


Regards,
Neha

@ Neha..

Your expaination is gud.. But, I found A also equally good contender..

Flaw in D could be - in the Q we are given with some program was started 2 yrs ago. it might be the placement program..

If previous yr it was recession time, then students won't get job.. hence, they won't drop out...

- Nipun

I think the answer is D.
The ques asks which statement weakens the argument.
And what's the argument here OR what are you asked to weaken?
The argument is- the program which instituted two years ago to improve the moral of the high school students is the reason for reduce in the no. of dropouts from the high school. so we have to weaken this, that is find a reason which is valid and shows that this Other thing is the reason for low rates of dropouts.

Now since we are cleared, what we are looking for, let's go through the answer chocies.

Choice A is irrelvant. we aren't looking for the reasons of- why there is high level of umemployment.
Choice B is also irrelevant. it says, the students had low moral even reaching to high school. is this what we are concerned with? NO!

Choice C contradicts the info given in the ques. it says, in the preceding year more high school students remained in the school than dropped out.
And the premesis in the ques clearly says that- Last year however, the city's high school drop out rate was significantly lower than the previous years rate.

Choice E says, The anti drop out program was primarily aimed at improving students moral in those high schools with high dropout rates, this supports the Argument. says that the program insititued is the reason, why there is reduce in the no of dropouts from high school.

Choice D says, High schools in the city established placement offices to assist graduates in obtaining employment, is absolutely correct cause it specifices that High school students are not dropping out but are helping them to graduate and then get employed. and weakens the arguement that why the program insitituted it NOT the reason for reduce in no. of drop outs.




Yogesh, i think you got the ques wrong.

Ple Nilesh, post the OA.

Hope the reasoning is clear.

Regards,
Neha
Can anyone post right answer explanation to below question?

High school students who feel that they are not succeeding in high school often drop out before graduating and go to work. Last year however , the city's high school drop out rate was significantly lower than the previous years rate.The is encouraging evidence that the program instituted two years ago to improve the moral of the high school students has began to take effect to reduce dropouts.

Which of the following , if true about the last year , most seriously weaken the argument?

A. There was a recession that caused high level of unemployment in the city.
B. The moral of students who drop out of high school had been low even before they reach high school.
C. As in the preceding year more high school students remained in the school than dropped out.
D. High schools in the city established placement offices to assist graduates in obtaining employment.
E.The anti drop out program was primarily aimed at improving students moral in those high schools with high dropout rates.

I think the answer is D.
The ques asks which statement weakens the argument.
And what's the argument here OR what are you asked to weaken?
The argument is- the program which instituted two years ago to improve the moral of the high school students is the reason for reduce in the no. of dropouts from the high school. so we have to weaken this, that is find a reason which is valid and shows that this Other thing is the reason for low rates of dropouts.

Now since we are cleared, what we are looking for, let's go through the answer chocies.

Choice A is irrelvant. we aren't looking for the reasons of- why there is high level of umemployment.
Choice B is also irrelevant. it says, the students had low moral even reaching to high school. is this what we are concerned with? NO!

Choice C contradicts the info given in the ques. it says, in the preceding year more high school students remained in the school than dropped out.
And the premesis in the ques clearly says that- Last year however, the city's high school drop out rate was significantly lower than the previous years rate.

Choice E says, The anti drop out program was primarily aimed at improving students moral in those high schools with high dropout rates, this supports the Argument. says that the program insititued is the reason, why there is reduce in the no of dropouts from high school.

Choice D says, High schools in the city established placement offices to assist graduates in obtaining employment, is absolutely correct cause it specifices that High school students are not dropping out but are helping them to graduate and then get employed. and weakens the arguement that why the program insitituted it NOT the reason for reduce in no. of drop outs.




@ Neha..

Your expaination is gud.. But, I found A also equally good contender..

Flaw in D could be - in the Q we are given with some program was started 2 yrs ago. it might be the placement program..

If previous yr it was recession time, then students won't get job.. hence, they won't drop out...

- Nipun



Thankyou Nipun.

Ple read the sentences in bold. The premise of the question says:
the program instituted two years ago to improve the moral of the high school students
So I think, it is clear, what is the purpose of the program? The program started to improve the moral of the high school students.

I do not think D has this flaw that- the program started for any other purpose?

And As far Choice A is concerned. choice A says-
There was a recession that caused high level of unemployment in the city.

Why are we concerned with the recession in the city? Does the cause of high level of umemployment that is recession tells us it is the reason for low rates of dropouts? How does it weakens the statement?

If you can explain the answers to my ques, ple do so. Would like to know your reasoning and do tell what makes you think, it's the asnwer.


Regards,
Neha

I think you are right... Good explanation.. thanks...

Thankyou Nipun.

Ple read the sentences in bold. The premise of the question says:
the program instituted two years ago to improve the moral of the high school students
So I think, it is clear, what is the purpose of the program? The program started to improve the moral of the high school students.

I do not think D has this flaw that- the program started for any other purpose?

And As far Choice A is concerned. choice A says-
There was a recession that caused high level of unemployment in the city.

Why are we concerned with the recession in the city? Does the cause of high level of umemployment that is recession tells us it is the reason for low rates of dropouts? How does it weakens the statement?

If you can explain the answers to my ques, ple do so. Would like to know your reasoning and do tell what makes you think, it's the asnwer.


Regards,
Neha
Nipunbans Says
I think you are right... Good explanation.. thanks...


You are welcome πŸ˜ƒ
In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and II
(E) III only

Can i have the correct answer to this question?
In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and II
(E) III only

Can i have the correct answer to this question?

I thought the answer to be E 'coz at the end the author concludes that the govt is inefficient and cites and reason for it. "This explains in large part why the govt is so inefficient"....'coz it is composed of civil service employees.

Though to my intense surprise the answer turned out to be A

It should be A.. because last option is uing "Most" which is not mentioned anywhere. A is the basic idea which these lines suggest..

In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and II
(E) III only
Can i have the correct answer to this question?
Nipunbans Says
It should be A.. because last option is uing "Most" which is not mentioned anywhere. A is the basic idea which these lines suggest..

Ok. Even if the word 'most' calls for extremity, which should normally be avoided, how does that make the first option correct? I mean where is the reference to the term 'workers' and how on earth will the job security have a negative impact on them??
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the declining importance of the two major political parties. It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms. It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best.
1. Which of the following is an assumption made in the argument above?
(A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party.
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.
(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties.
(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most elections.
??? Answer with a justifiable explanation.....
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the declining importance of the two major political parties. It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms. It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best.
1. Which of the following is an assumption made in the argument above?
(A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party.
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.
(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties.
(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most elections.
??? Answer with a justifiable explanation.....

I would go with A...wts the OA

Few questions which took me hell lot of a time and are still beyond my scope of comprehension. I shall be glad if someone could help me explain them in detail.

Current farm policy is institutionalized penalization of consumers. It increases food prices for middle- and low-income families and costs the taxpayer billions of dollars a year.
Which of the following statements, if true, would provide support for the authors claims above?
I. Farm subsidies amount to roughly $20 billion a year in federal payouts and $12 billion more in higher food prices.
II. According to a study by the Department of Agriculture, each $1 of benefits provided to farmers for ethanol production costs consumers and taxpayers $4.
III. The average full-time farmers have an average net worth of over $300,000.
(A) I only
(B) II only
(C) III only
(D) I and II only
(E) I, II, and III

With Proposition 13, if you bought your house 11 years ago for $75,000, your property tax would be approximately $914 a year (1 percent of $75,000 increased by 2 percent each year for 11 years); and if your neighbor bought an identical house next door to you for $200,000 this year, his tax would be $2,000 (1 percent of $200,000). Without Proposition 13, both you and your neighbor would pay $6,000 a year in property taxes (3 percent of $200,000).
Which of the following is the conclusion for which the author most likely is arguing in the passage above?
(A) Proposition 13 is unconstitutional because it imposes an unequal tax on properties of equal value.
(B) If Proposition 13 is repealed, every homeowner is likely to experience a substantial increase in property taxes.
(C) By preventing inflation from driving up property values, Proposition 13 has saved homeowners thousands of dollars in property taxes.
(D) If Proposition 13 is not repealed, identical properties will continue to be taxed at different rates.

Yes, it is indeed A. Can you help he explain the reason?

rohit_gem2611 Says
I would go with A...wts the OA

Yes, it is indeed A. Can i help me explain the reason to it?
We have heard a good deal in recent years about the declining importance of the two major political parties. It is the mass media, we are told, that decide the outcome of elections, not the power of the parties. But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years, and in the last nationwide campaign, the two major parties raised and spent more money than ever before in support of their candidates and platforms. It seems clear that reports of the imminent demise of the two-party system are premature at best.
1. Which of the following is an assumption made in the argument above?
(A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party.
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would be evidence of a decline in the importance of the two major parties.
(C) The two-party system has contributed significantly to the stability of the American political structure.
(D) The mass media tend to favor an independent or third-party candidate over a candidate from one of the two major parties.
(E) The mass media are relatively unimportant in deciding the outcome of most elections.
??? Answer with a justifiable explanation.....


IMO (A)
(B) A significant increase in the number of third-party candidates would suggest that it is the mass media that affects/decides the results of an election. Not the decline in the importnace of two major parties.
(C) is mentioned nowhere in the paragraph.
(D) Where the paragraph is saying "But it is worth noting that no independent or third-party candidate has won any important election in recent years" it is contradicting the first statement regarding the declining importance of major parties and also supporting the point that they have rather raised more money.
(E) the passage doesn't say that mass media is relatively unimportant but is not the sole decision-maker as is evident from election outcomes the recent years


As the major parties' being able to raise and spend more money is given as an evident that they have not decline & are still influential . This is the assumption made in the passage that (A) The amount of money raised and spent by a political party is one valid criterion for judging the influence of the party.

See Q again:- "In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money." - So, no manager is interested in Firing his/her employees.
"Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf." - workers know that they won't be fired even if they are doing wrong or useless to govt. that means tooo much job security..
"This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient."

Also, Workers is just used in place of employees.

razor's edge Says
Ok. Even if the word 'most' calls for extremity, which should normally be avoided, how does that make the first option correct? I mean where is the reference to the term 'workers' and how on earth will the job security have a negative impact on them??
In the effort to fire a Civil Service employee, his or her manager may have to spend up to $100,000 of tax money. Since Civil Service employees know how hard it is to fire them, they tend to loaf. This explains in large part why the government is so inefficient.
It can be properly inferred on the basis of the statements above that the author believes which of the following?
I. Too much job security can have a negative influence on workers.
II. More government workers should be fired.
III. Most government workers are Civil Service employees.
(A) I only
(B) I and III only
(C) II only
(D) I, II, and II
(E) III only
Can i have the correct answer to this question?


I will choose A

we can eliminate B, D and E as III is too extreme
and II says that more employees should be fire, which is not the point of the argument

leaves us with I only and hence option A

Cheers !!