-
sunnyguest
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 5:29 am
Hi,
I came across this question which I do not disagree with the standard answer. It's from Q22 of Kaplan GMAT CAT 1.
===========================================
A national survey of 10,000 employed Americans indicated that, as a group, those who had held four or more different jobs in the past 5 years registered by far the highest level of dissatisfaction with their family and work. From this, psychologists concluded that people who do not remain in a job situation long enough to establish strong personal and professional ties tend to develop an attitude of discontent that carries into all other aspects of their lives.
Which of the following is the most effective rebuttal to the conclusion drawn by the psychologists from the survey?
1) The psychologists fail to recognize that many people who have remained in the same job for the past five years may also have registered high levels of dissatisfaction.
2) The psychologists neglect the question of whether moving from job to job may be an effect rather than a cause of general discontent and dissatisfaction.
==============================================
I have filtered down the answer choices to only 2 choices, listed 1) and 2) above. I do understand that this is a question on causation and according to GMAT CR Bible, there are 5 ways to weaken a causation argument.
1) weakens the argument by showing that the cause is missing though the effect is there.
2) weakens the argument by reversing the cause-effect relationship.
In my opinion, both answer choices look correct to me. However, GMAT Kaplan has rejected 1) as it focuses on the wrong group.
Can someone please explain what I'm missing out on here and if there is any amendment that needs to be made to GMAT CR Bible?
I came across this question which I do not disagree with the standard answer. It's from Q22 of Kaplan GMAT CAT 1.
===========================================
A national survey of 10,000 employed Americans indicated that, as a group, those who had held four or more different jobs in the past 5 years registered by far the highest level of dissatisfaction with their family and work. From this, psychologists concluded that people who do not remain in a job situation long enough to establish strong personal and professional ties tend to develop an attitude of discontent that carries into all other aspects of their lives.
Which of the following is the most effective rebuttal to the conclusion drawn by the psychologists from the survey?
1) The psychologists fail to recognize that many people who have remained in the same job for the past five years may also have registered high levels of dissatisfaction.
2) The psychologists neglect the question of whether moving from job to job may be an effect rather than a cause of general discontent and dissatisfaction.
==============================================
I have filtered down the answer choices to only 2 choices, listed 1) and 2) above. I do understand that this is a question on causation and according to GMAT CR Bible, there are 5 ways to weaken a causation argument.
1) weakens the argument by showing that the cause is missing though the effect is there.
2) weakens the argument by reversing the cause-effect relationship.
In my opinion, both answer choices look correct to me. However, GMAT Kaplan has rejected 1) as it focuses on the wrong group.
Can someone please explain what I'm missing out on here and if there is any amendment that needs to be made to GMAT CR Bible?
