LSAT Passage 47

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 1:11 pm
Thanked: 2 times
GMAT Score:590

LSAT Passage 47

by viv_gmat » Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:06 am
A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration of
the controls on the trams shuttling along mineshafts. Each tram had a
steering wheel that rose straight up from the floor, with a brake pedal on
one side and an accelerator pedal on the other. There was no room to
turn the tram around, so to reverse direction the driver simply took a
seat on the other side of the steering wheel, whereupon what had been
the brake became the accelerator, and vice versa. While this may sound
ingenious, it proved disastrous.

Many people set an electric burner on high thinking that it will heat up
faster that way: they have the mental model of a gas stove, whose knobs
actually do increase the heat's intensity. On an electric stove, however,
the knob is merely a switch that turns on the burner and then turns it off
when a certain temperature is reached.

Consider the humble wristwatch, which has been transformed into a
kind of wrist-mounted personal computer, with a digital display and a
calculator pad whose buttons are too small to be pressed by a human
fingertip. By replacing the watch's conventional stem-winding mechanism
with a mystifying arrangement of tiny buttons, the manufacturers created
a watch that was hard to reset.

One leading manufacturer was distressed to discover that a line of its
particularly advanced digitals was being returned as defective by the
thousands, even though the watches actually worked perfectly well.
Further investigation revealed that they were coming back soon after
purchase and thereafter in two large batches-in the spring and the fall,
when the time changed.

Charles Mauro, a consultant in New York City, is a prominent member
of a branch of engineering generally known as ergonomics, or humanfactors-
the only field specifically addressing the question of product
usability. Mauro was brought in to provide some help to the watch
manufacturer, which was experiencing what Mauro calls the "•complexity
problem.

With complexity defined as a fundamental mismatch between
the demands of a technology and the capabilities of its user, the term
nicely captures the essence of our current technological predicament.
A growing number of technologists speak of user-centred design as a
means of scrupulously maintaining the user's perspective from start to
finish, adding technology only where necessary. When confronted by
some mystifying piece of high-tech gadgetry, consumers naturally feel
that there is something wrong with them if they can't figure it out. In
truth it is usually not their fault. Mauro attributes the confusion to the
fact that most products are "•technology-driven, their nature determined
not by consumers and their needs and desires but by engineers who are
too often entranced with the myriad capabilities of the microprocessors
that lie at the devices' hearts


2. When consumers feel that there is something wrong with them if they can't
figure a high-tech gadget out, which of the following assumptions are they
making?
A. The gadget was designed for ready use by the average consumer.
B. Technology can only be understood by engineer-types.
C. The gadget designers were blind to the consumers' needs.
D. Everyone is equally capable of understanding new technology.
E. they are not as intelligent as the other person

Please explain your answer.

a
Source: — Reading Comprehension |

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 5:34 am
Location: India
Thanked: 310 times
Followed by:123 members
GMAT Score:750

by cans » Mon Jun 06, 2011 4:38 pm
IMO A
Consumers think something is wrong with them and thus b,c are eliminated
Everyone assumes that a new product was for average customer. If they can't understand, it means they are below average. and thus something is wrong with them.
If my post helped you- let me know by pushing the thanks button ;)

Contact me about long distance tutoring!
[email protected]

Cans!!

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Mon Jun 06, 2011 6:50 pm
How about D
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 8:03 am
Thanked: 19 times

by krishnasty » Mon Jun 06, 2011 10:18 pm
IMO A
vikram4689 wrote:How about D
It can't be D because as Cans explained, the line clearly states that wehn users are not able to figure out some high tech gadget, they believe that something's wrong with them. If D was supposed to be the ans ("Everyone is equally capable of understanding new technology." ), the user must have believed that everyone is equally capable of understanding technology and the company or the product is useless, which is not so. Hence, D can be ruled out.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:02 am
sry could not agree with your argument: the user must have believed that everyone is equally capable of understanding technology and the company or the product is useless, which is not so

If a particular person,who believes that everyone is able to understand the technology, is not able to understand the technology why would he believe that product is useless. If he is not able to understand then it is his fault because he is not able to understand something that everyone else is.

When consumers is not able to figure out some high tech gadget then they feel there is some problem with them because they assume that everyone else is able to understand it and they are at fault for not understanding it.
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 126
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:37 pm
Followed by:4 members

by sandeep800 » Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:33 pm
IMO A
A body of clay, a mind full of play, a moment's life - that is me!!!

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:15 pm
Anyone who would like to share knowledge on A & D
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Fri Jun 10, 2011 12:40 am
vikram4689 wrote:Anyone who would like to share knowledge on A & D
the assumption made by the consumers is, basically, "consumers should be able to figure out the device's operation", or "it is reasonable to expect the average consumer to understand the device." (this is why they feel ashamed when they can't figure it out.)

this is basically what (a) says, and is in no way related to such an extreme statement as (d). i.e., even if there are inequalities in people's understanding of technology, that has no effect on whether the average consumer should be able to understand one particular device. (if the passage said that everyone should be able to understand anything that anyone else can understand, that might justify (d); however, this passage comes nowhere close to making such a claim.)
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Fri Jun 10, 2011 2:23 am
Thanks Ron, actually i thought that for all those consumers who are below average if they are are not able to figure out then they will not feel bad if they make assumption stated in A BUT if assumption is what option D says then anyone,not able to understand, will bad. So i thought that scope of A is limited while D covers that.
even if there are inequalities in people's understanding of technology, that has no effect on whether the average consumer should be able to understand one particular device.
Why are we talking of average consumers only,passage does not mentions average consumer. Should not we talk of all consumers
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:14 am
vikram4689 wrote:Thanks Ron, actually i thought that for all those consumers who are below average if they are are not able to figure out then they will not feel bad
i think the problem here is that you're thinking of "the average person" too mathematically -- "the average person" is NOT some statistical 50th percentile.
"the average person" is an expression that means, basically, "any random person off the street". so, in its common use, this term basically means just about everyone.
if they make assumption stated in A BUT if assumption is what option D says then anyone,not able to understand, will bad.
regarding (d) -- nope. if you take (d) as your choice, then it's also possible that nobody will understand. remember, it just says "equally capable" -- it doesn't set the level of that capability.

--

because this is an assumption question, you can also try the negation method. the consumer's argument is "i can't figure this out; therefore, i feel stupid."
if you reverse choice (a) -- i.e., the gadget is *not* designed in a way that average people can understand -- then there are no longer any grounds for the consumer to feel this way.
if you reverse choice (d), there's basically no effect on this reasoning.

--

finally, look at how ridiculously extreme choice (d) is -- everyone has exactly the same level of tech capability.
this is an unreasonable statement to begin with, because, frankly, it's just sort of ridiculous.

the GMAT and the LSAT will *NOT* have critical reasoning problems on which ridiculous or unreasonable statements are correct answers.
if you see a statement that is completely implausible in the real world, eliminate it!
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron

Legendary Member
Posts: 784
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
Thanked: 114 times
Followed by:12 members

by patanjali.purpose » Sat Aug 27, 2011 6:05 am
viv_gmat wrote:A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration of
the controls on the trams shuttling along mineshafts. Each tram had a
steering wheel that rose straight up from the floor, with a brake pedal on
one side and an accelerator pedal on the other. There was no room to
turn the tram around, so to reverse direction the driver simply took a
seat on the other side of the steering wheel, whereupon what had been
the brake became the accelerator, and vice versa. While this may sound
ingenious, it proved disastrous.

Many people set an electric burner on high thinking that it will heat up
faster that way: they have the mental model of a gas stove, whose knobs
actually do increase the heat's intensity. On an electric stove, however,
the knob is merely a switch that turns on the burner and then turns it off
when a certain temperature is reached.

Consider the humble wristwatch, which has been transformed into a
kind of wrist-mounted personal computer, with a digital display and a
calculator pad whose buttons are too small to be pressed by a human
fingertip. By replacing the watch's conventional stem-winding mechanism
with a mystifying arrangement of tiny buttons, the manufacturers created
a watch that was hard to reset.

One leading manufacturer was distressed to discover that a line of its
particularly advanced digitals was being returned as defective by the
thousands, even though the watches actually worked perfectly well.
Further investigation revealed that they were coming back soon after
purchase and thereafter in two large batches-in the spring and the fall,
when the time changed.

Charles Mauro, a consultant in New York City, is a prominent member
of a branch of engineering generally known as ergonomics, or humanfactors-
the only field specifically addressing the question of product
usability. Mauro was brought in to provide some help to the watch
manufacturer, which was experiencing what Mauro calls the "•complexity
problem.

With complexity defined as a fundamental mismatch between
the demands of a technology and the capabilities of its user, the term
nicely captures the essence of our current technological predicament.
A growing number of technologists speak of user-centred design as a
means of scrupulously maintaining the user's perspective from start to
finish, adding technology only where necessary. When confronted by
some mystifying piece of high-tech gadgetry, consumers naturally feel
that there is something wrong with them if they can't figure it out. In
truth it is usually not their fault. Mauro attributes the confusion to the
fact that most products are "•technology-driven, their nature determined
not by consumers and their needs and desires but by engineers who are
too often entranced with the myriad capabilities of the microprocessors
that lie at the devices' hearts
.

I want to reopen this thread with another question:

Based on the passage, an ergonomics expert would be likely to place high value on a product that:
A. required no instruction at all to use.
B. did not incorporate modern technology.
C. could be easily manipulated by hand.
D. solved complex problems for its user.
E. required elaborate instructions for proper usage

Pls explain your choice

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:24 pm
Thanked: 37 times
Followed by:6 members

by navami » Tue Aug 30, 2011 6:31 am
IMO A
This time no looking back!!!
Navami

Legendary Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:53 am
Thanked: 52 times
Followed by:5 members

by killer1387 » Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:04 am
a +1

OA??

Legendary Member
Posts: 784
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
Thanked: 114 times
Followed by:12 members

by patanjali.purpose » Tue Aug 30, 2011 12:50 pm
navami wrote:IMO A
Could you pls share why you think A is the answer.

Thanks