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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

CR prep question

Expert replies
by jamesk486 » Tue May 22, 2007 1:30 pm
A birth is more like to be difficult when the mother is over the age of 40 than when she is younger. Regardless of the mother's age, a person whose birth was difficult is more likely to be ambidextrous than is a person whose birth was not difficult. Since other causes of ambidexterity are not related to the mother's age, there must be more ambidextrous people who were born to women over 40 than there are ambidextrous people who were born to younger women.




The argument is most vulnerable to which one of the following criticisms?

(A) It assumes what it sets out to establish

(B) It overlooks the possibility that fewer children are born to women over 40 than to women under 40

(C) It fails to specify what percentage of people in the population as a whole are ambidextrous

(D) It does not state how old a child must be before its handedness can be determined

(E) It neglects to explain how difficulties during birth can result in a child's ambidexterity
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by f2001290 » Wed May 23, 2007 3:39 am
I will go with B.
Join the discussion

by 800GMAT » Wed May 23, 2007 3:32 pm
My answer is E.

Reasoning Attempt:
If X comes after Y, then we can say that Y caused X only if we are able to explicitly show how Y caused X.

So, if difficult birth implies ambidexterity, then the author should also explain how is ambidexterity caused by difficult child birth. Else it will be a logical fallacy- causation vs correlation
Join the discussion

by ldoolitt » Wed May 23, 2007 3:33 pm
I concur. Its B

A) It doesn't assume what it set out to prove; that more ambedex. people are born to women over 40 than under 40.

C) It does fail to specify it but the conclusion does include the total sample space of people born (provided there are no people born to men).

D) Irrelavant to the argument.

E) It was not the purpose of the argument to explain WHY, only to give a correlation.
Join the discussion

by ldoolitt » Wed May 23, 2007 3:36 pm
800GMAT wrote:My answer is E.

Reasoning Attempt:
If X comes after Y, then we can say that Y caused X only if we are able to explicitly show how Y caused X.

So, if difficult birth implies ambidexterity, then the author should also explain how is ambidexterity caused by difficult child birth. Else it will be a logical fallacy- causation vs correlation
Good point, but its not saying that Y caused X (ie its not saying that difficult birth CAUSED ambidex) only that there is a correlation between difficult births and ambidex.

Edit: Note the question does have some ambiguity as it does mention causation in the conclusion sentence, however the conclusion is "there must be more ambidextrous people who were born to women over 40 than there are ambidextrous people who were born to younger women." not "difficult births cause ambidexterity."
Join the discussion

by 800GMAT » Mon May 28, 2007 10:57 pm
Oh I misread this question .....what is the OA?
Join the discussion

by pbanavara » Wed Oct 15, 2008 11:49 pm
It's B :

There are "more" ambidextrous babies born to women over 40 -> which fails to take into account the total number of babies born to women over 40.

So let's say:

20 babies were born to women over 40 and 50% were ambidextrous = 10
100 babies were born to women below 40 and 20% were ambidextrous = 20

which will refute the argument and hence will be a valid criticism.

-pradeep
Join the discussion

by khanshainur » Thu May 12, 2016 12:54 pm
I would go with option B as the correct option
Join the discussion