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

Redeem

Barking dogs

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 10:48 pm

Barking dogs

by hirakeshkumar » Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:10 pm
My neighbor's dogs bark and howl every time their owner lets them outside. My CPA told me that dogs tend to bark and howl when they see birds resting in the top branches of their favorite trees. I personally believe they bark and howl because they enjoy disrupting my meditations.

Which of the following can be inferred from the preceding passage?

1. The dogs must be abused by their owners.
2. The dogs' owners do not care how they are viewed by their neighbors.
3. There are many pedestrians who walk by this neighbor's house, and the dogs are starving for attention.
4. The dogs enjoy being outside.
5. The dogs will bark and howl at 3 a.m. if they are outside at that time.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:29 am
Location: Hyderabad, India
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:770

by simplyjat » Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:21 pm
IMHO 5.

1. The dogs must be abused by their owners.
Nothing is said about this in the argument

2. The dogs' owners do not care how they are viewed by their neighbors.
Nothing is said about the owners' intentions

3. There are many pedestrians who walk by this neighbor's house, and the dogs are starving for attention.
Nothing is said about dogs' intentions

4. The dogs enjoy being outside.
Nothing is said about the dogs' feelings

5. The dogs will bark and howl at 3 a.m. if they are outside at that time.
The first sentence states that every time they are out, they will bark, and we can assume that time is not relevant here
simplyjat
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

Re: Barking dogs

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Fri Apr 25, 2008 12:22 pm
hirakeshkumar wrote:My neighbor's dogs bark and howl every time their owner lets them outside. My CPA told me that dogs tend to bark and howl when they see birds resting in the top branches of their favorite trees. I personally believe they bark and howl because they enjoy disrupting my meditations.

Which of the following can be inferred from the preceding passage?

1. The dogs must be abused by their owners.
2. The dogs' owners do not care how they are viewed by their neighbors.
3. There are many pedestrians who walk by this neighbor's house, and the dogs are starving for attention.
4. The dogs enjoy being outside.
5. The dogs will bark and howl at 3 a.m. if they are outside at that time.
The correct answer to an inference question is something that MUST BE TRUE based on one or more of the statements in the stimulus.

If an answer choice "could be true, but you're not sure", then it's NOT the correct answer.

When we read the stimulus for an inference question, we want to focus on the most concrete information, since it's easier to draw a conclusion based on certainty than on speculation.

In the above stimulus, only the first sentence gives us anything concrete with which to work: the neighbour's dogs bark and howl EVERY TIME their owner lets them outside.

Based on that statement, we ALMOST know that (5) MUST be true.

I say "almost", because the actual conditional in the first sentence is "every time their owner lets them outside" and (5) says "if they are outside at that time", without stating how they got outside.

From a formal logic perspective, we can only be certain that we get the result of a conditional statement if every condition is met. So, although (5) is certainly the best of the choices, it's not actually a "MUST be true". For example, it's possible that if the dogs sneak out of the window on their own, they're very quiet.

On the actual GMAT, you shouldn't see anything with even this level of ambiguity. From where did you get this question?
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Top
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 2:17 pm

by hema123 » Fri May 16, 2008 7:29 am
IMO is 2 . Here only 2 relates owner's and neighbors.
1 is extreme.

Stuart, could you please confirm if I am thinking in the right direction here.

Thanks
Top
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 2:17 pm

by hema123 » Fri May 16, 2008 7:30 am
IMO is 2 . Here only 2 relates owner's and neighbors.
1 is extreme.

Stuart, could you please confirm if I am thinking in the right direction here.

Thanks
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3225
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 1710 times
Followed by:614 members
GMAT Score:800

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Fri May 16, 2008 8:26 pm
hema123 wrote:IMO is 2 . Here only 2 relates owner's and neighbors.
1 is extreme.

Stuart, could you please confirm if I am thinking in the right direction here.

Thanks
2 is not a "must be true" at all - we have no evidence that the owner does it on purpose or even knows that his neighbours exist.
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 6:17 am
Location: madrid
Thanked: 171 times
Followed by:64 members
GMAT Score:790

by kevincanspain » Mon May 03, 2010 1:40 am
Stuart Kovinsky wrote:
hirakeshkumar wrote:My neighbor's dogs bark and howl every time their owner lets them outside. My CPA told me that dogs tend to bark and howl when they see birds resting in the top branches of their favorite trees. I personally believe they bark and howl because they enjoy disrupting my meditations.

Which of the following can be inferred from the preceding passage?

1. The dogs must be abused by their owners.
2. The dogs' owners do not care how they are viewed by their neighbors.
3. There are many pedestrians who walk by this neighbor's house, and the dogs are starving for attention.
4. The dogs enjoy being outside.
5. The dogs will bark and howl at 3 a.m. if they are outside at that time.
The correct answer to an inference question is something that MUST BE TRUE based on one or more of the statements in the stimulus.

If an answer choice "could be true, but you're not sure", then it's NOT the correct answer.

When we read the stimulus for an inference question, we want to focus on the most concrete information, since it's easier to draw a conclusion based on certainty than on speculation.

In the above stimulus, only the first sentence gives us anything concrete with which to work: the neighbour's dogs bark and howl EVERY TIME their owner lets them outside.

Based on that statement, we ALMOST know that (5) MUST be true.

I say "almost", because the actual conditional in the first sentence is "every time their owner lets them outside" and (5) says "if they are outside at that time", without stating how they got outside.

From a formal logic perspective, we can only be certain that we get the result of a conditional statement if every condition is met. So, although (5) is certainly the best of the choices, it's not actually a "MUST be true". For example, it's possible that if the dogs sneak out of the window on their own, they're very quiet.

On the actual GMAT, you shouldn't see anything with even this level of ambiguity. From where did you get this question?
I agree that E cannot be justified, for we don't know if the neighbours have ever let the dogs out at 3am

This would be like my saying:

Every time I see Lisa, she is working. Thus, if I ever see Lisa at 3am, she will be working.

(What if you always see her during normal working hours?)
Kevin Armstrong
GMAT Instructor
Gmatclasses
Madrid
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:32 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 67 times
Followed by:2 members

by sumanr84 » Mon May 03, 2010 5:12 am
kevincanspain wrote: I agree that E cannot be justified, for we don't know if the neighbours have ever let the dogs out at 3am

This would be like my saying:

Every time I see Lisa, she is working. Thus, if I ever see Lisa at 3am, she will be working.

(What if you always see her during normal working hours?)
Wow !! Nice example. This strategy can be helpful in solving many alike question. Thanks Kevin..
I am on a break !!
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1