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.

Evaluation---Scientific Diciplines

Expert replies
by amysky_0205 » Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:46 am
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

OA: A

Can someone explain?
I chose B instead of A....
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Tommy Wallach » Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:52 am
Hey Amysky,

This is interesting. I know this question (it's in the OG), but this isn't the question that's typically asked on it. Where did you find this?

Anyway, this passage presents two possible explanations for a phenomenon:

Phenomenon: Scientists GENERALLY don't do creative stuff after 40

Explanation #1: Aging makes you less creative.
Explanation #2: Being in a field too long makes you less creative.

We need some answer that helps us decide between these two explanations.

(A) If the majority of scientists who do creative stuff after 40 are new to their respective field, that would support the second explanation. If they aren't, it would support the first one.

(B) Imagine you had an answer to this question. Yes, scientists choose research projects based on the fact that they probably won't do creative stuff late in life. So is it aging or being in the field too long that is causing that problem. Who knows?

(C) This is totally out of scope. Even if they enjoy other stuff more, we don't know whether it was aging or being in the field too long that caused them to burn out.

(D) This is irrelevant, too. This is just about money.

(E) Again, whether there's variation in age or not, we still don't know what is causing the change in productivity.
Tommy Wallach, Company Expert
ManhattanGMAT

If you found this posting mega-helpful, feel free to thank and/or follow me!
Join the discussion

by amysky_0205 » Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:21 am
Tommy Wallach wrote:Hey Amysky,

This is interesting. I know this question (it's in the OG), but this isn't the question that's typically asked on it. Where did you find this?

Anyway, this passage presents two possible explanations for a phenomenon:

Phenomenon: Scientists GENERALLY don't do creative stuff after 40

Explanation #1: Aging makes you less creative.
Explanation #2: Being in a field too long makes you less creative.

We need some answer that helps us decide between these two explanations.

(A) If the majority of scientists who do creative stuff after 40 are new to their respective field, that would support the second explanation. If they aren't, it would support the first one.

(B) Imagine you had an answer to this question. Yes, scientists choose research projects based on the fact that they probably won't do creative stuff late in life. So is it aging or being in the field too long that is causing that problem. Who knows?

(C) This is totally out of scope. Even if they enjoy other stuff more, we don't know whether it was aging or being in the field too long that caused them to burn out.

(D) This is irrelevant, too. This is just about money.

(E) Again, whether there's variation in age or not, we still don't know what is causing the change in productivity.


Hi Tommy,

tks for ur reply in advance.

I got this question from internet.
I think someone must change this answer choices some how.

(:
Join the discussion