In general, jobs are harder to get in times of economic recession because many businesses cut back operations. However, any future recessions in Vargonia will probably not reduce the availability of teaching jobs at government-funded schools. This is because Vargonia has just introduced a legal requirement that education in government-funded schools be available, free of charge, to all Vargonian children regardless of the state of the economy, and that current student-teacher ratios not be exceeded.Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?(A) The current student-teacher ratio at Vargonia's government-funded schools is higher than it was during the most recent period of economic recession.(B) During recent periods when the Vargonian economy has been strong, almost 25 percent of Vargonian children have attended privately funded schools, many of which charge substantial fees.(C) Nearly 20 percent more teachers are currently employed in Vargonia's government-funded schools than had been employed in those schools in the period before the last economic recession.(D) Teachers in Vargonia's government-funded schools are well paid relative to teachers in most privately funded schools in Vargonia, many of which rely heavily on part-time teachers.(E) During the last economic recession in Vargonia, the government permanently closed a number of the schools that it had funded Between 1980 and 2000 the sea otter population of the Aleutian Islands declined precipitously. There were no signs of disease or malnutrition, so there was probably an increase in the number of otters being eaten by predators. Orcas will eat otters when seals, their normal prey, are unavailable, and the Aleutian Islands seal population declined dramatically in the 1980s. Therefore, orcas were most likely the immediate cause of the otter population decline.Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument'?(A) The population of sea urchins, the main food of sea otters, has increased since the sea otter population declined.(B) Seals do not eat sea otters, nor do they compete with sea otters for food.(C) Most of the surviving sea otters live in a bay that is inaccessible to orcas.(D) The population of orcas in the Aleutian Islands has declined since the 1980s.(E) An increase in commercial ﬁshing near the Aleutian Islands in the 1980s caused a slight decline in the population of the ﬁsh that seals use for food. B * A. The effect noted in the studies is not limited to patrons who have credit cards. - Ok. But do people who don't have credit cards tip higher or lower than people with credit cards? The option statement doesn't provide this. Without this information, this statement doesn't have an impact on the hypothesis. If it had stated that people without credit cards tip lower than others when presented with trays with credit card logo, then it would have strengthened the hypothesis.B. Patrons who are under financial pressure from their credit-card obligations tend to tip less when presented with a restaurant bill on a tray with credit-card logo than when the tray has no logo. - This is interesting. This says that guys under credit card obligations tend to tip less when presented with trays with credit card logo. This kind of guy has lesser spending power than his available cash, exactly opposite to the case considered in the argument and this guy tips less, which is also exactly opposite the case in the argument. This kind of behavior is expected if the hypothesis holds. Since the hypothesis says that credit card logo reminds one of his spending power - a guy with good credit limit and low credit card obligations is expected to spend more and a guy with high credit card obligations is expected to spend less. Therefore, the given statement provides an evidence that the hypothesis holds in a different scenario. Therefore, this is the CORRECT option.C. In virtually all of the cases in the studies, the patrons who paid bills in cash did not possess credit cards. - This actually weakens the hypothesis. If a guy doesn't have a credit card, how would a credit card logo remind him of his higher spending power?D. In general, restaurant patrons who pay their bills in cash leave larger tips than do those who pay by credit card. - This is irrelevant comparison. We are not concerned with the payment method here.E. The percentage of restaurant bills paid with given brand of credit card increases when that credit card's logo is displayed on the tray with which the bill is prepared. - Again, we are not concerened how the payment is made. Black Americans are, on the whole, about twice as likely as White Americans to develop high blood pressure. This likelihood also holds for westernized Black Africans when compared to White Africans. Researchers have hypothesized that this predisposition in westernized Blacks may reflect an interaction between western high-salt diets and genes that adapted to an environmental scarcity of salt.Which of the following statements about present-day, westernized Black Africans, if true, would most tend to confirm the researchers' hypothesis?(A) The blood pressures of those descended from peoples situated throughout their history in Senegal and Gambia, where salt was always available, are low.(B) The unusually high salt consumption in certain areas of Africa represents a serious health problem.(C) Because of their blood pressure levels, most White Africans have markedly decreased their salt consumption.(D) Blood pressures are low among the Yoruba, who, throughout their history, have been situated far inland from sources of sea salt and far south of Saharan salt mines.(E) No significant differences in salt metabolism have been found between those people who have had salt available throughout their history and those who have not. In Colorado subalpine meadows, nonnative dandelions co-occur with a native ﬂower, the larkspur. Bumblebees visit both species, creating the potential for interactions between the two species with respect to pollination. In a recent study, researchers selected 16 plots containing both species; all dandelions were removed from eight plots; the remaining eight control plots were left undisturbed. The control plots yielded significantly more larkspur seeds than the dandelion-free plots, leading the researchers to conclude that the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researchers' reasoning?(A) Bumblebees preferentially visit dandelions over larkspurs in mixed plots.(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.(C) If left unchecked, nonnative species like dandelions quickly crowd out native species.(D) Seed germination is a more reliable measure of a species' ﬁtness than seed production.(E) Soil disturbances can result in fewer blooms, and hence lower seed production. B * A) What happens as people grow older is an entirely separate subject. This question deals with a group of people in general, so zeroing in on a random sub-set, a specific niche within the overall group about what those people can do to stay sharp as they grow old is irrelevant. It's Out Of Focus.B) Yes. Here we're presented with an entirely separate cause as to the correlation between social interaction and a boost in mental skills. If someone is suffering from a medical condition that impacts mental sharpness and that if the illness impacts the willingness to socialize, of course that would artificially boost the correlation between social interaction - and mental sharpness. It's not fair to say that being more social is the cause of possessing greater mental skills then. This option brutalizes the reasoning in the argument.C) If some people are strong at both, that could appears to be aligned with the argument that we're asked to weaken since it shows the presence of both the cause and effect. However, it's just not clear entirely clear how C either strengthens or weakens.D) It's not at all clear how analyzing data vs gathering and analyzing data from prior studies would weaken or strengthen. By itself, this option does nothing. Flawed data is a sucker choice on the GMAT. The GMAT doesn't question the integrity of data. It questions the integrity of the reasoning interpreting the data.E) This option attacks the wrong end of the causal relationship. We need an option that points to an alternative cause of a boost in mental skills (as in we need an option that shows that it's not social interaction that boosts mental skills). This option just attempts to redefine how mental skill is defined by the study, and the option in NO way addresses the cause of the heightened mental skills. Instead, if this option had attacked the cause rather than the effect, then it would weaken too. For example, if it said: "The tasks defining social interaction compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to social interaction" then this option would then reveal that there is a totally different cause other than social interaction. E * 1) Read question stem to determine question type.Which of the following statements, if true, would cast the most doubt on the conclusion drawn above?We have a Weaken the Argument question.2) Read passage and summarize premises and the conclusion.PREMISE: Images from GBTs (ground-based telescopes) distorted by atmospherePREMISE: Space telescopes above atmosphere should make detailed imagesCONCLUSION: GBTs to become obsolete for advanced research3) Check the answer choices while reminding yourself of the CONCLUSION.(A) An orbiting space telescope due to be launched this year is far behind schedule and over budget, whereas the largest ground-based telescope was both within budget and on schedule.Does this weaken the conclusion that GBTs will become obsolete for advanced research?These project-management issues do NOT affect the conclusion.ELIMINATE A(B) Ground-based telescopes located on mountain summits are not subject to the kinds of atmospheric distortion which, at low altitudes, make stars appear to twinkle.In other words, high GBTs are better than low GBTs with regard to one particular phenomenon: the twinkling star effect.Does this weaken the conclusion that GBTs will become obsolete for advanced research?Not really. The reason for the soon-to-be demise of GBTs is that they suffer from atmospheric effects.So, regardless of whether some GBTs are immune to ONE TYPE of atmospheric effect, the space telescopes are immune to ALL atmospheric effects.ELIMINATE B(C) By careful choice of observatory location, it is possible for large-aperture telescopes to avoid most of the kind of wind turbulence that can distort image quality.This is similar to answer choice B.In other words, SOME (well-placed) GBTs are better than other GBTs with regard to ONE particular atmospheric phenomenon: wind turbulence.Does this weaken the conclusion that GBTs will become obsolete for advanced research?ELIMINATE C (see answer choice B for rationale)(D) When large-aperture telescopes are located at high altitudes near the equator, they permit the best Earth-based observations of the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, a prime target of astronomical research.This is similar to answer choices B & C.Once again, we're told that SOME GBTs are better than other GBTs for a specific reason.Does this weaken the conclusion that GBTs will become obsolete for advanced research?No.Answer choice D does not suggest that any GBTs are better suited than space telescopes are to study the universe.ELIMINATE D(E) Detailed spectral analyses, upon which astronomers rely for determining the chemical composition and evolutionary history of stars, require telescopes with more light-gathering capacity than space telescopes can provide.Does this weaken the conclusion that GBTs will become obsolete for advanced research?Yes!If space telescopes are too small for certain research, then researches will still need some GBTs to perform the research described above.Answer: E Images from ground-based telescopes are invariably distorted by the Earth's atmosphere. Orbiting space telescopes, however, operating above Earth's atmosphere, should provide superbly detailed images. Therefore, ground-based telescopes will soon become obsolete for advanced astronomical research purposes.Which of the following statements, if true, would cast the most doubt on the conclusion drawn above?(A) An orbiting space telescope due to be launched this year is far behind schedule and over budget, whereas the largest ground-based telescope was both within budget and on schedule.(B) Ground-based telescopes located on mountain summits are not subject to the kinds of atmospheric distortion which, at low altitudes, make stars appear to twinkle.(C) By careful choice of observatory location, it is possible for large-aperture telescopes to avoid most of the kind of wind turbulence that can distort image quality.(D) When large-aperture telescopes are located at high altitudes near the equator, they permit the best Earth-based observations of the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, a prime target of astronomical research.(E) Detailed spectral analyses, upon which astronomers rely for determining the chemical composition and evolutionary history of stars, require telescopes with more light-gathering capacity than space telescopes can provide. A A. The human population of Florida increased significantly during the 1990s. <- Hmmm... we were told reports of alligator sightings have increased. Does that necessarily mean that the population of alligators has increased? The argument seems to conflate increased reports with increased population, but that doesn't have to be true. If there are more people around to see and report alligators, it wouldn't necessarily make sense to use the change in sightings to draw conclusions about the population. (this is a common gap in reasoning we want to be on the lookout for in GMAT CR!)B. The hunting restrictions applied to commercial as well as private hunters. <- Who the hunting restrictions applied to doesn't really matter to us here. This does nothing to tell us why it might not make sense to use the given evidence to draw the cited conclusion.C. The number of sightings of alligators in lakes and swamps increased greatly in Florida during the 1990s. <- Providing additional sources of alligator sightings definitely doesn't weaken the connection between evidence and conclusion. This just provides further evidence that more alligator sightings are taking place. We need something that specifically breaks up the connection between sightings and population.D. Throughout the 1990s, selling alligator products was more strictly regulated than hunting was. <- ....Okay, so what? Even if people are more limited in their ability to sell gator jerky and gator-skin boots, this does nothing to break up the connection between the sightings reported and population.E. Most of the sightings of alligators on golf courses and lawns in the 1990s occurred at times at which few people were present on those golf courses and lawns. <- Well, we only need one person around to "see something and say something" about the alligators, so this definitely doesn't tell us that the reports cannot be used to substantiate an increase in population. If anything, if few people are present when the sightings occur and* the reports of sightings increase, it would be less likely that we have repeat sightings where many people make the same report. So, definitely not a weakener here. Keep in mind, we aren't trying to weaken the evidence... it's already been presented as fact. We have already been told that sightings increased during this time. We want something that tells us increased sightings does not necessarily = increased alligator population. A * (A) When levels of personal retirement savings increase, consumer borrowing always increase correspondingly.
The government wants to modify the income-tax structure to make people put more of their income into retirement savings accounts. This should increase the amount of money available to borrowers. But will that money go to development loans for business? What if that money goes to other kinds of loans?Choice (A) tells us that consumer borrowing WILL increase if personal retirement savings increases. So more money will become available for borrowing, but consumers will borrow some or all of that money. That leaves less (if any) money for development loans. It's possible that some of that money will be used for development loans and that the government's plan will still succeed, but choice (A) raises a serious doubt. Hang on to this one.
(B) The increased tax revenue the government would receive as a result of business expansion would not offset the loss in revenue from personal income taxes during the first year of the plan.
Choice (B) tells us that the government will suffer a net loss in revenue as a result of this plan. But we are not trying to determine how the plan will impact the government's revenue. We are simply trying to determine whether the plan will succeed in increasing the amount of money available for development loans for businesses. Choice (B) is irrelevant and can be eliminated.
(C) Even with tax incentives, some people will choose not to increase their levels of retirement savings.
It's okay if SOME people chose not to increase their levels of retirement savings. As long as some people DO increase their levels of retirement savings, the government's plan could still work. In other words, we don't need ALL people to increase their savings, only some. Choice (C) does not raise serious doubt and can be eliminated.
(D) Bankers generally will not continue to lend money to businesses whose prospective earnings are insufficient to meet their loan repayment schedules.
This is obviously a problem for those businesses whose prospective earnings are insufficient to meet their loan repayment schedules. But we are not concerned with that situation. We simply want to know whether the modifications to the income-tax structure will increase the amount of moneyavailablefor development loans for business. As long as the amountavailablefor such loans increases, the government's plan will be a success, regardless of whether some businesses can't access that money because they've had problems paying off their loans. Eliminate (D).
(E) The modified tax structure would give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings.
A possible misunderstanding of choice (E) is to conclude that taxpayers will get the same tax savings regardless ofhow muchthey deposit in retirement savings accounts. That might give people less incentive to increase their retirement savings (i.e. "Why should I put more into my retirement savings if it won't increase by tax savings?") and thus jeopardize the government's plan.But this is not what choice (E) says. Rather, it says that taxpayers will, regardless of their incomes, get "the same tax savingsfor a given increasein their retirement savings." In other words, if two taxpayers have different incomes but make identical increases in their retirement savings, then both would get the same tax savings. Thus, choice (E) does not affect the government's plan to induce individual taxpayers to put a larger portion of their incomes into retirement savings accounts. Eliminate (E).
A year ago, Dietz Foods launched a yearlong advertising campaign for its canned tuna. Last year Dietz sold 12 million cans of tuna compared to the 10 million sold during the previous year, an increase directly attributable to new customers brought in by the campaign. Profits from the additional sales, however, were substantially less than the cost of the advertising campaign. Clearly, therefore, the campaign did nothing to further Dietz's economic interests.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?(A) Sales of canned tuna account for a relatively small percentage of Dietz Foods' profits.(B) Most of the people who bought Dietz's canned tuna for the first time as a result of the campaign were already loyal customers of other Dietz products.(C) A less expensive advertising campaign would have brought in significantly fewer new customers for Dietz's canned tuna than did the campaign Dietz Foods launched last year.(D) Dietz made money on sales of canned tuna last year.(E) In each of the past five years, there was a steep, industry-wide decline in sales of canned tuna. Guillemots are birds of Arctic regions. They feed on fish that gather beneath thin sheets of floating ice, and they nest on nearby land. Guillemots need 80 consecutive snow-free days in a year to raise their chicks, so until average temperatures in the Arctic began to rise recently, the guillemots' range was limited to the southernmost Arctic coast. Therefore, if the warming continues, the guillemots' range will probably be enlarged by being extended northward along the coast.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?(A) Even if the warming trend continues, there will still be years in which guillemot chicks are killed by an unusually early snow.(B) If the Arctic warming continues, guillemots' current predators are likely to succeed in extending their own range farther north.(C) Guillemots nest in coastal areas, where temperatures are generally higher than in inland areas.(D) If the Arctic warming continues, much of the thin ice in the southern Arctic will disappear.(E) The fish that guillemots eat are currently preyed on by a wider variety of predators in the southernmost Arctic regions than they are farther north. √As you deconstruct the argument in this Boldface question, recognize first that the first bolded sentence is a premise, stated as a fact. Further, the beginning of the next sentence states "with that trend...," establishing that the argument will build from that fact. From here you can eliminate choices B and D (each of which says that the first portion is a conclusion). You can also be very skeptical of choice E: even though it correctly says that the first portion is a premise, note that it goes on to say that the argument proves that premise false. As you will see from the rest of the paragraph, the argument is concerned with attacking a conclusion drawn from that premise, but never tries to disprove the fact itself. For this reason, E is also incorrect.
As you look at the second bolded portion, note that the phrase "there has been debate as to whether we can conclude" is also direct cause for eliminating E: the second bolded portion is not the conclusion itself, but rather the introduction of the conclusion. You should see that this language matches choice A perfectly, so choice A is correct.
Similarly C is incorrect, as the second bolded portion introduces a conclusion that could be drawn based on the first premise: it does not, as C says "undermine that evidence." To the contrary, it builds upon it.
Note that the conclusion of this argument is the phrase "the answer is no," which comes right next to the explanation for that conclusion, "since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles..." This allows you to eliminate choice D, as the evidence for the argument's conclusion is everything beginning with "since," not the second bolded portion. Choice A is correct.
B.√In this question you are told that while the number of full time, tenured professors at the university has increased by 10, average class size has increased despite the fact that the number of students at the university has remained roughly the same. To resolve this apparent paradox, your first step should be to find the gap. Do tenured professors teach enough that an increase in the number of tenured professors would decrease class size? Are they teaching fewer classes?
The only answer choices that begin to address any of these questions are (B), (C) and (D). Choice (B) states that the number of adjunct professors - "who teach the majority of classes" has declined by 25. Even if there was an increase in tenured professors, since adjunct professors teach the majority of classes their dismissal will have an outsized effect on class size and will drive average class size up. Choice (B) is correct.
Choice (C) is close, but you don't know that there has been an increase in the number of tenured professors who don't teach. Perhaps there are two professors who (for whatever reason) only do research and that this number hasn't changed for 20 years. If so, this information would have no effect on class size. Note also that the stimulus states that the average class size increased. Even if all 10 new tenured professors were research-only, their impact (or lack thereof) wouldn't increase the average class size...it would just leave it unchanged. Similarly, choice (D) can be eliminated because even though some classes are led by graduate students you have no information about the relative numbers of graduate students available to teach.
Between the other two answers, (A) can be eliminated because there is no indication that the number of students in these very large classes has increased and choice (E) can be eliminated because there is no indication that not including these classes changes the average class size in any meaningful way.
In recent years, the number of full time, tenured faculty in the state university system has increased by 10 and the number of students has remained roughly the same. However, prospective and current students have noted that average class size has increased.
Which of the following, if true, would resolve the apparent contradiction noted above?
A few of the classes at the university have class sizes of 100 students or more, well in excess of the median class size.
The number of adjunct professors, who teach the majority of classes at the university, has been cut by 25.
Some full-time tenured professors are researchers and do not lecture on a regular basis.
Some classes are led by graduate students who are not full time rather than by full time, tenured professors.
Lab and discussion classes, which are often led by teaching assistants, are not included in the calculation of class size.
In addition to the boom in tax revenue, the federal government's books are being helped by lower defense spending, a drop in outlays for benefits like Medicaid, and proceeds from the sales of General Motors and Chrysler, the automakers that were taken over by Washington in 2009.
are being helped by lower defense spending, a drop in outlays for benefits like Medicaid, and proceeds from the sales of General Motors and Chrysler, the automakers
have been helped by lower defense spending, a drop in outlays for benefits like Medicaid, and by proceeds from the sales of General Motors and Chrysler, automakers
have been helped by lower defense spending, a drop in outlays for benefits like Medicaid, proceeds from the sales of General Motors and Chrysler, and by the automakers
are being helped by lower defense spending, by a drop in outlays for benefits like Medicaid, and proceeds from the sales of General Motors and Chrysler, the automakers
were helped by lower defense spending and a drop in outlays for benefits like Medicaid, also by proceeds from the sales of General Motors and Chrysler, the automakers
In reading the stimulus in this difficult problem, you will probably first note the following flaw: the goal is to reduce illegal drug use, but the focus is only on preventing marijuana imports from Gordenia (what about other drugs?). However, there is another major issue: the legislation was implemented two years ago, but the data used is only from the last year. What if the legislation was incredibly successful right after it was implemented, slashing drug use by over 50% in the first year. Then, in the last year, drug use remained constant or even went up slightly. Clearly the legislation was still very successful even though last year's data suggests otherwise. Answer choice (C) shows exactly how the legislation could have been very successful even with last year's data. (A) is tricky because it relates to a flaw you should have noticed, but it does not show how the legislation could have been successful. Rather it shows how it would have been unsuccessful. If most of the drug problems relate to drugs other than marijuana, then a plan focusing only on a major marijuana exporting country would not help. For (B), the goal of the legislation was to reduce use in the major cities, so what takes place outside of the cities is not important. In (D) importation amounts from other countries is not relevant to the argument as the plan focuses on Gordenia. For (E) visits to drug treatment centers could have decreased for any number of reasons so that does not relate to the efficacy of the legislation. Answer is (C). B.√This is an "Explain the Paradox" question. For this type of question, remember that you must find an answer choice that bridges the gap between the two facts given explains why both can be true. Don't waste time trying to anticipate the correct answer, but instead just identify the gap that needs to be resolved and look for an answer that does so.
In this question, you know that a new program would drastically increase the amount of work new professors would need to do but would not apply to existing professors. However, existing professors are still protesting it. Why would professors protest a policy that seemingly doesn't affect them and may even favor them? The correct answer will bridge this gap, probably by giving some sort of reason that the policy will have a negate effect on them, even if indirectly.
Choice (B) matches this and gives a reason for professors to be against the policy. Although they are not directly affected, their ability to get bonuses (and therefore get paid) is affected since they need to match the output of their colleagues in order to get a bonus. Since this includes the professors who are hired under the new system, that means that they have to match the increased output even if they aren't directly affected by the change. This is the correct answer.
Answer choice (A) gives further support to the idea that professors shouldn't be upset at the new policy, since it does not affect them, and it can be eliminated. Answer choices (C) and (D) have nothing to do with either policy, and therefore don't address the paradox at all. Answer choice (E) similarly does not address any sort of change, so it can be eliminated since it addresses neither policy.
The board of a state university is considering a proposed policy that would greatly increase the amount of research professors are required to publish each year, saying it will improve the output and visibility of the university. This policy would, unlike previous research policies, only be applied to faculty hired after its adoption, so it is surprising that the university's current professors are protesting against it.
Which of the following, if true, would best explain the opposition of current professors to the proposed policy change?
Under the current policy, professors at the state university are not required to increase the amount of research they publish each year.
In order to maintain their status at the university and earn salary bonuses, faculty must match the research output of their colleagues.
The quality of research that professors publish each year does not necessarily result in improved status among their colleagues.
Other state universities have their own research requirements - in some cases, quite a bit above the standards of this university - for certain areas of study.
Liberal Arts professors make up the majority of the university's professors, and are currently required to publish a significantly greater amount of research than professors in the Sciences.
In 1975, the number of automobile related deaths among young people ages 16-21 was about 10,000. In 2000, this number was closer to 40,000. Clearly, today's young people drive much more recklessly and are more accident prone than were those in 1975.
Which of the following statements, if true, would most weaken the argument made above?
There were fewer traffic laws and regulations in 1975 compared with those in 2000.
Between 1975 and 2000, the number of licensed teenagers in the country more than quadrupled.
Surveys show that young drivers tend to drive more recklessly when there are other passengers of the same age riding in the car.
Improvements to automobile safety technology have significantly reduced the chances of being killed in an automobile accident.
According to insurance data, senior citizens, not teenagers, had the highest per-driver accident rate in 2000.