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

Redeem

Psychologist's Help

Expert replies
by heshamelaziry » Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:55 pm
A consumer magazine surveyed people who had sought a psychologist's help with a personal problem. Of those responding who had received treatment for 6 months or less, 20 percent claimed that treatment "made things a lot better." Of those responding who had received longer treatment, 36 percent claimed that treatment "made things a lot better." Therefore, psychological treatment lasting more than 6 months is more effective than shorter-term treatment.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument:

(1) Of the respondents who had received treatment for longer than 6 months, 10 percent said that treatment made things worse.

(B) Patients who had received treatment for longer than 6 months were more likely to respond to the survey than were those who had received treatment for a shorter time.

(C) Patient who feel they are doing well in treatment tend to remain in treatment, while those who are doing poorly tend to quit earlier.

(D) Patients who were dissatisfied with their treatments were more likely to feel a need to express their feelings about it and thus to return the survey.

(E) Many psychologists encourage their patients to receive treatment for longer than 6 months.


OA after short discussion. Please explain your answer choice only, unless you wanna explain every choice.

I will test ont he 26th :roll:
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by rainmaker » Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:08 pm
It is clearly B. I don't think it needs any explanation.
Join the discussion

by heshamelaziry » Fri Oct 09, 2009 7:34 pm
rainmaker wrote:It is clearly B. I don't think it needs any explanation.
Try again :)
Join the discussion

by vaibhav.iit2002 » Sat Oct 10, 2009 4:05 am
IMO C

B has percentage and absolute values problem. C should be the one.

OA?
Join the discussion

by xcusemeplz2009 » Sat Oct 10, 2009 4:31 am
IMO C
conclusion is longer treatment >eff than shoter treatment.

to suport this a pool of respondent were surveyed

in order to weaken this we need to that prove there is a flaw in selecting the pool , i.e is what if pool surveyed consist of more person who left the treatment as they were unstaissfied.or in other sense if the group of shrt term treatment consist of majority of unstatisfied people then the two group is not equal.

only c shows this .

A)i guess it is supporting
b)as long as its a % number doesn't matter
d)it can be true to bth the groups
e) i guess irrelevant

OA pls
It does not matter how many times you get knocked down , but how many times you get up
Join the discussion

by Jatinder » Sat Oct 10, 2009 7:31 am
xcusemeplz2009 wrote:IMO C
conclusion is longer treatment >eff than shoter treatment.

to suport this a pool of respondent were surveyed

in order to weaken this we need to that prove there is a flaw in selecting the pool , i.e is what if pool surveyed consist of more person who left the treatment as they were unstaissfied.or in other sense if the group of shrt term treatment consist of majority of unstatisfied people then the two group is not equal.

only c shows this .

A)i guess it is supporting
b)as long as its a % number doesn't matter
d)it can be true to bth the groups
e) i guess irrelevant

OA pls
How do we know that how does the feeling is related with duration of the treatment?

those who have consulted the doctors for the time less than 6 months could feel either way.

IMO B
Keep flying
Join the discussion

by Domnu » Sat Oct 10, 2009 8:23 am
IMO, the answer should be C. Here's why:

[spoiler]A - out of scope
B - just because more patients respond, this doesn't mean that statistics are as skewed as they are.
C - if people feel that they are doing well in treatment, they stay. The contrapositive states that if they leave, they don't feel that they are doing well. Therefore, in the two groups, more people who do well stay after 6 months compared to those who leave before 6 months. We'll keep this one.
D - This still illustrates symmetry between the two cases. It is possible that people who don't like the treatment still stay with the psychologist. This, in fact, undermines the statistics displayed.
E - out of scope[/spoiler]
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Join the discussion

by heshamelaziry » Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:33 am
vaibhav.iit2002 wrote:IMO C

B has percentage and absolute values problem. C should be the one.

OA?
Could you kindly explain what is the percentage problem with choice B ?
Join the discussion

by heshamelaziry » Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:35 am
Domnu wrote:IMO, the answer should be C. Here's why:

[spoiler]A - out of scope
B - just because more patients respond, this doesn't mean that statistics are as skewed as they are.
C - if people feel that they are doing well in treatment, they stay. The contrapositive states that if they leave, they don't feel that they are doing well. Therefore, in the two groups, more people who do well stay after 6 months compared to those who leave before 6 months. We'll keep this one.
D - This still illustrates symmetry between the two cases. It is possible that people who don't like the treatment still stay with the psychologist. This, in fact, undermines the statistics displayed.
E - out of scope[/spoiler]

Could you please elaborate on choice B ?
Join the discussion

by heshamelaziry » Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:36 am
xcusemeplz2009 wrote:IMO C
conclusion is longer treatment >eff than shoter treatment.

to suport this a pool of respondent were surveyed

in order to weaken this we need to that prove there is a flaw in selecting the pool , i.e is what if pool surveyed consist of more person who left the treatment as they were unstaissfied.or in other sense if the group of shrt term treatment consist of majority of unstatisfied people then the two group is not equal.

only c shows this .

A)i guess it is supporting
b)as long as its a % number doesn't matter
d)it can be true to bth the groups
e) i guess irrelevant

OA pls
Could you please explain what you meant by this with respect to B:

b)as long as its a % number doesn't matter
Join the discussion

by xcusemeplz2009 » Sat Oct 10, 2009 10:29 am
heshamelaziry wrote:
xcusemeplz2009 wrote:IMO C
conclusion is longer treatment >eff than shoter treatment.

to suport this a pool of respondent were surveyed

in order to weaken this we need to that prove there is a flaw in selecting the pool , i.e is what if pool surveyed consist of more person who left the treatment as they were unstaissfied.or in other sense if the group of shrt term treatment consist of majority of unstatisfied people then the two group is not equal.

only c shows this .

A)i guess it is supporting
b)as long as its a % number doesn't matter
d)it can be true to bth the groups
e) i guess irrelevant

OA pls
Could you please explain what you meant by this with respect to B:

b)as long as its a % number doesn't matter
stimulus is conveying that 36% of those who recieved > 6 mnths term responded +ve , so even if number of respondant is more(as B tells) the percentage is going to be same only.

therfore B doesn't weakens it
It does not matter how many times you get knocked down , but how many times you get up
Join the discussion

by mehravikas » Sat Oct 10, 2009 3:25 pm
B is a trap...even if the percentage is high for the patients who have longer treatment, still the number of people for short term and long term treatment, who feel +ve with the treatment, could be the same.

IMO - C
Join the discussion

by heshamelaziry » Sat Oct 10, 2009 3:44 pm
OA is C

Thank you all for your contributions.

I find most of these statistics questions very challenging. I get most of them wrong. I will test on the 26th. I hope nothing like this shows up.

If you have statistics questions please share.
Join the discussion