Beat The GMAT a GMAT & MBA community

OA is C.

My favorite post on this one is from UWHusky - who said everything that I am about to say below - except in like 10 words! "Negate this assumption and the whole system is rendered pointless, other than for novelty purpose."

Okay here is the "official" explanation:

This stimulus has a two-part conclusion: first, that the program will save the state millions of dollars and, second, that there will not be an increase in the crime rate. If this question required you to guarantee the conclusion, you would need an answer choice that addresses both sides and made these outcomes inevitable. However, this is an assumption question, so you are focusing on the answer choice that is required by the conclusion, but not necessarily enough to guarantee the conclusion.

You can evaluate the answers to assumption questions by eliminating those that are off-topic and then negate the remaining answer choice to see if the absence of the answer choice undermines the argument’s conclusion.

A) This answer is on topic so negate: The negation is that judges will not give “equal weight” to the cost and the deterrent effect of each punishment. The argument does not require that specifically equal weight is given, of course it is important that some weight be given to cost and some to deterrence but this need not be equal for the conclusion to work.

B) The negation of this answer is that “not all” types of punishment have the same deterrent effect on crime. This argument does not require this, for example, if the less expensive punishments were more effective that would not undermine the conclusion, it would actually enhance the conclusion. Don’t be tricked into thinking that this answer choice means that less expensive punishments can still be effective, this answer goes beyond that and says that all punishments have the SAME deterrent effect. This is not required.

C) The negation is that the state DOES have laws requiring specific punishments for each crime. It is clear that having a specific punishment for each crime does not support the idea that judges can hand down less expensive sentences. In fact, if this answer choice is taken away, meaning that the punishment for each crime is mandatory, then what good is giving the judge any information on sentences?

D) This answer choice would very much strengthen the idea that by using punishments such as probation judges could save the taxpayers’ money without increasing the crime rate. However, this is an assumption question and the argument does not require that less expensive punishments be MORE effective - equally effective would certainly work!

E) I originally wrote this answer to say that the voters are “at least somewhat supportive” of the use of this computer program. That was too good of a choice because if the voters give no support to the program then they may elected leaders who get rid of it. C would still have been a better choice, but I changed this answer to say that the voters are “very supportive.” It is not necessary that the voters be very supportive - it would be help if they do not take to the streets to protest the use of the program but they do not need to be “very supportive.”


Nice work on that one. Hope that explanation satisfies!

_________________
David Newland, JD, MA, MAE
GMAT Instructor, Tutor, and Author
Veritas Prep

kris610 - One very common way that assumption answer choices can be eliminated is when they are too specific. Let me give you an example:

If the conclusion is "China will win the most medals in the 2012 Olympics in London."

One answer choice might be that "China will win exactly 5 more medals than the United States." Can you see how this is too specific? If we negate this and say that China will not win exactly 5 more medals it is still possible that they will win 1 more medal or 20 more medals or any number except 5.

This is where answer choice A from the computers assisting judges question comes in.

Here is my explanation of A, see if it make more sense when you think about the fact that it might be more specific than necessary.

"A) This answer is on topic so negate: The negation is that judges will not give “equal weight” to the cost and the deterrent effect of each punishment. The argument does not require that specifically equal weight is given, of course it is important that some weight be given to cost and some to deterrence but this need not be equal for the conclusion to work."

In other words, before the computer assistance, judges may be giving basically no thought to the cost, since they likely do not know what it is. With the computers they will give at least some thought to the cost but it does not need to be exactly equal.

I hope that works for you. When I wrote this question my design for choice A was that it would be an example of an answer that is too specific.

_________________
David Newland, JD, MA, MAE
GMAT Instructor, Tutor, and Author
Veritas Prep

First let me say that I understand the reasons for referring to something as a sufficient assumption or a necessary assumption. I use a similar distinction on the LSAT where this concept would actually apply much better. A sufficient assumption will "bridge the gap" in an argument and almost guarantee that the conclusion is true. This type of assumption is something that you can predict before turning to the answer choices.

Here is an example. "I like mildly spiced curry, therefore I will like the dinner that you are cooking. Now we can look at this and say that I am assuming that you are cooking a mildly spiced curry. If not then there is not connection to this argument.

The other type of assumption that you mention is the "necessary assumption." This type of assumption is one where you cannot really predict as you head to the answer choices. I might say that "My friend will pick me up at the airport." There are many necessary assumptions here that cannot be predict, however if you negate these you will see that they are required. Here are two that you may not have thought of:

1)I have a friend.

2) I will at some point be at an airport.

You can see that if you negate either of these then the conclusion fails. This second type is more of the classic approach to assumption questions on the GMAT.

In fact, now that I have discussed these types I can say that this distinction is, in my opinion, not very important on the GMAT. You have asked me above "what if I get a necessary and a sufficient assumption on the same problem? The answer is that you will not. There will only ever be one correct answer to any GMAT assumption question and that answer choice is the one that is necessary.

In other words, there will be only one answer that when negated truly undermines the conclusion. And negating an answer choice that would be a better answer for a strengthen question will not truly undermine the conclusion either.

Look at D above. D) Less expensive punishments, such as probation, are more effective in preventing that defendant from committing another crime.

This would make a great strengthen answer! The punishments are cheaper AND more effective? Wow! That really helps to strengthen our use of these computer systems. But is it necessary? That is the key word FOR ANY ASSUMPTION. If an answer choice is not necessary it is not the correct answer to any assumption on the GMAT.

So let's negate D and see if it was truly necessary. "D) Less expensive punishments, such as probation, are NOT more effective in preventing that defendant from committing another crime. (my negation is in bold). As you can see, this only tells us that less expensive punishments are not more effective. They could still be equally effective. Equally effective AND less expensive sounds like it would do what the conclusion calls for which is "save the state millions of dollars each year and will not result in any increase in the crime rate."

So while D - the strengthen answer - is nice, we can live without it and so it is not the assumption.

C we cannot live without. As ArunangsuSahu mentions above, if you take away C the whole argument fails. That is a correct assumption answer.

_________________
David Newland, JD, MA, MAE
GMAT Instructor, Tutor, and Author
Veritas Prep