Critical Reasoning

A factory was trying out a new process for producing one of its products, with the goal of reducing production
costs. A trial production run using the new process showed a 15 percent reduction in costs compared with past
performance using the standard process. The production managers therefore concluded that the new process
did produce a cost savings.
Which of the following, if true, casts most doubt on the production manager’s conclusion?
(A) In the cost reduction project that eventually led to the trial of the new process, production managers had
initially been seeking cost reductions of 50 percent.
(B) Analysis of the trial of the new process showed that the cost reduction during the trial was entirely
attributable to a reduction in the umber of finished products rejected by quality control.
(C) While the trial was being conducted, production costs at the factory for a similar product, produced without
benefit of the new process, also showed a 15 percent reduction.
(D) Although some of the factory’s managers have been arguing that the product is outdated and ought to be
redesigned, the use of the new production process does not involve any changes in the finished product.
(E) Since the new process differs from the standard process only in the way in which the stage of production are
organized and ordered, the cost of the materials used in the product is the same in both processes.

Would go with C. Any other thoughts?

vcb wrote:Would go with C. Any other thoughts?

Agreed.

This is cause/effect argument.

Cause: New process.
Effect: Lower production cost.

In order to cast doubt on an argument, you have to weaken the argument. In this case, answer choice 'C' weakens the argument by showing that effect without the cause. If another products production cost decreased by the same percentage, can we without a doubt conclude that the cause of the reduction in this instance was the new process? No. It could be attributed to something else.

Remember, to weaken a cause/effect argument you must (1) show the effect without the cause, (2) show the cause without the effect or (3) show that an alternate cause could be responsible.

What’s the official answer?

I also think answer is C
The reduction was also there without new process
this means reduction is not bcoz of process but bcoz of something else.

A is wrong because it is ot relevant how much % is imp
B is wrong because it strengthens the conculsion
C is wrong as this is only targetted at this specific product. Does not matter what happens with similar products
D to me seems like the right answer
E is also wrong because it also kinds of strengthns.

Thank you guys.

OA - C.

Got it right in my second attempt.
Sad thing is,i fail to read choices patiently which is leading to my mistakes.

Indradeep wrote:A is wrong because it is ot relevant how much % is imp
B is wrong because it strengthens the conculsion
C is wrong as this is only targetted at this specific product. Does not matter what happens with similar products
D to me seems like the right answer
E is also wrong because it also kinds of strengthns.

I understand why you would eliminate 'C' based on "outside" information; however, these type of questions allow for outside information to be brought in to the argument in order to weaken it. Remember, you cannot bring in outside information, the test makers can.

Further, in weaken questions, it is okay to disprove a cause/effect argument by showing a similar instance where the cause did not produce the same effect, or the effect occurred without the cause.

adding to aglope's comment -

outside information brought in by GMAT is alllowed in weaken/strengthen questions, but never in assumption/inference/conclusion questions.

I will Go with option C in this case