BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Attention Deficit Disorder

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

Attention Deficit Disorder

by komal » Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:22 pm
Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) is a condition characterized by an inability to focus on any topic for a prolonged period of time, and is especially common among children five to ten years old. A recent study has shown that 85 percent of seven-year-old children with ADD watch, on average, more than five hours of television a day. It is therefore very likely that Ed, age seven, has ADD, since he watches roughly six hours of television a day.
The argument above is flawed because it
(A) cites as a direct causal mechanism a factor that may only be a partial cause of the condition in question
(B) fails to indicate the chances of having ADD among seven-year-old children who watch more than five hours of television a day
(C) limits the description of the symptoms of ADD to an inability to focus for a prolonged period of time
(D) fails to consider the possibility that Ed may be among the 15 percent of children who do not watch more than five hours of television a day
(E) does not allow for other causes of ADD besides television watching

OA B
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2109
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:25 pm
Location: New Jersey
Thanked: 109 times
Followed by:79 members
GMAT Score:640

by money9111 » Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:07 pm
i chose E but i totally understand why the answer was B... i should have reread the question again because then I would have gotten it.
My goal is to make MBA applicants take onus over their process.

My story from Pre-MBA to Cornell MBA - New Post in Pre-MBA blog

Me featured on Poets & Quants

Free Book for MBA Applicants

Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Tue Mar 16, 2010 4:42 pm
I got an answer as E. I don't understand why B....what is the source of this question?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:47 pm
Thanked: 10 times

by Phirozz » Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:10 pm
komal wrote:Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) is a condition characterized by an inability to focus on any topic for a prolonged period of time, and is especially common among children five to ten years old. A recent study has shown that 85 percent of seven-year-old children with ADD watch, on average, more than five hours of television a day. It is therefore very likely that Ed, age seven, has ADD, since he watches roughly six hours of television a day.
The argument above is flawed because it
(A) cites as a direct causal mechanism a factor that may only be a partial cause of the condition in question
(B) fails to indicate the chances of having ADD among seven-year-old children who watch more than five hours of television a day
(C) limits the description of the symptoms of ADD to an inability to focus for a prolonged period of time
(D) fails to consider the possibility that Ed may be among the 15 percent of children who do not watch more than five hours of television a day
(E) does not allow for other causes of ADD besides television watching

OA B
Answer ios clearly B.
85% of children with ADD watch TV more than 5 hrs a day, but its not saying anything about what % of seven yr children suffer from ADD (without knowing which conclusion is invalid)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 610
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 12:33 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:2 members

by kstv » Tue Mar 16, 2010 9:14 pm
85 % (definitely more than 50%) with ADD watch more than 5 hrs TV. So it is something about people with ADD which leads to watch TV for more than 5 hrs on an average. Notice, that it is not long hours of TV which gives them ADD. While the Premise is people with ADD watch > 5 hrs TV, one cannot conclude like in the argument that
ED who is 7 (Common age for ADD) and watches > 5 hrs TV has ADD.
(B) rightly questions this. Consider in the sample 20 % of kids (5 to 10) have ADD. That is 17 % kids have ADD and watch > 5 hrs TV. Says nothing about chances of 80% of the normal kids who watch TV > 5hrs, to develop ADD.
(A) looked promising but the term 'direct causal mechanism' is difficult to decipher. Hope someone explains it in the thread.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:570

by reply2spg » Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:18 am
It clearly says 'how many seven-year-old children are with ADD'
Phirozz wrote:
komal wrote:Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) is a condition characterized by an inability to focus on any topic for a prolonged period of time, and is especially common among children five to ten years old. A recent study has shown that 85 percent of seven-year-old children with ADD watch, on average, more than five hours of television a day. It is therefore very likely that Ed, age seven, has ADD, since he watches roughly six hours of television a day.
The argument above is flawed because it
(A) cites as a direct causal mechanism a factor that may only be a partial cause of the condition in question
(B) fails to indicate the chances of having ADD among seven-year-old children who watch more than five hours of television a day
(C) limits the description of the symptoms of ADD to an inability to focus for a prolonged period of time
(D) fails to consider the possibility that Ed may be among the 15 percent of children who do not watch more than five hours of television a day
(E) does not allow for other causes of ADD besides television watching

OA B
Answer ios clearly B.
85% of children with ADD watch TV more than 5 hrs a day, but its not saying anything about what % of seven yr children suffer from ADD (without knowing which conclusion is invalid)
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 134
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:44 pm
Thanked: 14 times

by m&m » Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:02 am
I'm not sure of B - what's the source?

Even if you knew B - there's still a gap that links the ADD condition of a lack of focus to extended (or reduced) TV watching. You could say that if he/she can watch TV for that long then he/she should be able to focus on tv watching. C could equally be the answer - though I do agree B needs to be known too.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:42 pm
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:1 members

by vineetbatra » Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:52 am
komal wrote:Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) is a condition characterized by an inability to focus on any topic for a prolonged period of time, and is especially common among children five to ten years old. A recent study has shown that 85 percent of seven-year-old children with ADD watch, on average, more than five hours of television a day. It is therefore very likely that Ed, age seven, has ADD, since he watches roughly six hours of television a day.
The argument above is flawed because it
(A) cites as a direct causal mechanism a factor that may only be a partial cause of the condition in question
(B) fails to indicate the chances of having ADD among seven-year-old children who watch more than five hours of television a day
(C) limits the description of the symptoms of ADD to an inability to focus for a prolonged period of time (this is targeting the symptoms of ADD not relevant)
(D) fails to consider the possibility that Ed may be among the 15 percent of children who do not watch more than five hours of television a day (this ic opposite to the premise because it says ED watches 6 hrs)
(E) does not allow for other causes of ADD besides television watching (Contender)

OA B
I fail to understand how B is the choice

P1 Argument says ADD is common among ages 5-10,

P2 7 Yrs old with ADD watch TV > 5 hrs

Conclusion - Very Likely (85%) that ED (wathces 6 hrs of TV, which is >5) will have ADD.

This is a strong argument, but what if ADD causes kids to watch TV for > 5 hours- Reversal of causal assumption.

I am not sure what the answer is but B doesn't seem at all, it is just saying that the argument fails indicate the chances of having ADD among seven-year-old children who watch more than five hours of television a day, but this is what the argument is saying, so how does this weaken the argument.

We need an expert.

Let me ping someone
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:47 pm
Thanked: 10 times

by Phirozz » Fri Mar 19, 2010 7:00 pm
reply2spg wrote:It clearly says 'how many seven-year-old children are with ADD'

85 percent of seven-year-old children with ADD watch on average, more than five hours of television a day

Does the above line says anything about 'how many seven-year-old children have ADD' ???
We dont know what % of the seven yr children who watch TV more than 5 hrs a day have ADD. So conclusion is flawed.
Those 85% of children with ADD may form only 5% of children who watch more than 5 hrs of TV

Hope it helps !!
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 355
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:42 pm
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:1 members

by vineetbatra » Sat Mar 20, 2010 3:00 am
Phirozz, that makes sense man.

Thanks for the explanation.

Vineet
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 5:07 am
Location: India

by h_jitendras » Sun Mar 21, 2010 4:06 am
m&m wrote:I'm not sure of B - what's the source?

Even if you knew B - there's still a gap that links the ADD condition of a lack of focus to extended (or reduced) TV watching. You could say that if he/she can watch TV for that long then he/she should be able to focus on tv watching. C could equally be the answer - though I do agree B needs to be known too.
The source is Kaplan GMAT 800 book
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Wed Mar 24, 2010 9:33 am
Can someone please explain what is the problem with A although B has to be the OA for this one.....

Regards,
Phil
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:42 am

by mohnish104 » Mon May 06, 2013 6:22 am
i think this is the most difficult CR question i have ever come across
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 8:39 pm

by tanukalra99 » Mon May 06, 2013 11:03 am
Answer is B
No where it mentioned "five hours of television a day" is the cause of ADD in a seven year old .It can also be the after effects of ADD.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1