Critical Reasoning

In many scientific disciplines, scientists generally do not do highly creative work beyond the age of forty, a tendency that has normally been taken to show that aging carries with it a loss of creative capacity. However, by the age of forty most scientists have been working in their chosen field for at least fifteen years, so an alternative explanation is that spending too long in a single field reduces the opportunity for creative thought.

Investigating which of the following would be most useful in choosing between the competing explanations described above?

A. Whether among those scientists who do highly creative work beyond age forty a large proportion entered their field at a considerably later age than is common
B. Whether scientists' choice of research projects tends to be influenced by their own belief that their most creative work will be done relatively early in their career
C. Whether scientists who are older than forty tend to find more satisfaction in other activities, such as teaching and mentoring, than they do in pursuing their own research
D. Whether funding agencies are more inclined to award research grants to scientists who are veterans in their field than to scientists who are relative newcomers
E. Whether there is significant variation among scientific fields in the average age at which scientists working in those fields are at their most productive

Add another that is similar to the above question.

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
On the whole, scientists do their most creative work before age forty, a tendency that has been taken to show that aging carries with it a loss of creative capacity. An alternative explanation is that by age forty most scientists have worked in their field for fifteen or more years and that by then they have exhausted the opportunity for creative work in that field. Supporting this explanation is the finding that __________.

A. the average age of recipients of scientific research grants is significantly greater than forty
B. a disproportionately large number of the scientists who produce highly creative work beyond age forty entered their field at an older age than is common
C. many scientists temper their own expectations of what they can achieve in their research work by their belief that their creativity will decline as they age
D. scientists who are older than forty tend to find more satisfaction in other activities, such as teaching and mentoring, than they do in pursuing their own research
E. there is a similar diminution of creativity with age in nonscientific fields, such as poetry and musical composition


OA after discussion, please explain your reasoning for the benefit of other readers. Thanks.

IMO C for the first one. I know why some answers choices are wrong, but the rest I don't know why they are wrong. I lean towards C

As the thread title goes this is a hard one, you have to try all over again again perhaps give some of your thoughts why you choose one over the other.

For the first question: if the author is correct that it is over-familiarity with the discipline rather than age that reduces a scientist's creative output, then old scientists who are not overly familiar with the discipline should still be creative. Hence, choice A must be correct.

For relevant information questions, it is helpful to think about the author's assumption, and under what circumstances the author would be correct/incorrect.

...by similar reasoning, choice B must be the correct answer to the second question.

Testluv,

I gotta say your are right on the money for the first question. This is really hard CR for me to comprehend eventhough i already knew the answer for the first one i still answer incorrectly for the next one.

The OA is A,B

...I think you mean that I was right on the money for both questions!

For the first question: It is called a relevant information (or evaluate the argument) question. The right answer for these questions is a choice where if it goes one way, the argument is strengthened, and if it goes another way the argument is weakened. So, if a large proportion of old scientists who are creatively successful entered their field at an uncommonly late time, then the age explanation is weakened and the author's over-familarity-with-the-discipline explanation is strengthened. Conversely, if a large proportion of old scientists who are creatively successful entered their field at the common time, then his over-familiarity-with-the-discipline explanation is weakened.

Yeah typo you are right on the money for both question.

I have to say your explanation is brilliant. I get it now, earlier on i was really confused which is relevant and which is not. Your explanation clears everything.

Thanks.

I have to say your explanation is brilliant.

I agree!

Thanks for the kind words.