• 7 CATs FREE!
    If you earn 100 Forum Points

    Engage in the Beat The GMAT forums to earn
    100 points for $49 worth of Veritas practice GMATs FREE

    Veritas Prep
    VERITAS PRACTICE GMAT EXAMS
    Earn 10 Points Per Post
    Earn 10 Points Per Thanks
    Earn 10 Points Per Upvote
    REDEEM NOW

Hard Assumption - Manhattan

This topic has 2 expert replies and 3 member replies

Hard Assumption - Manhattan

Post

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Difficult



Adoption agency representative: It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process. However, there is no truth to the accusation against us of favoritism; our decisions have been guided solely by the best interests of the children. Indeed, all ten babies' new parents far surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by our own policy.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the representative's argument depends?

(A) The agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have not, in general, been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.

(B) Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.

(C) For a time period equal in duration to that during which the data were collected, the average number of babies placed by the agency is close to ten.

(D) Most prospective parents who apply to adopt babies do not meet the agency's criteria for adoption.

(E) The agency will only place babies with parents who not only meet the legal and institutional criteria for adoption, but who in fact surpass those criteria.

Source: Manhattan
OA: B

Dear GMATGuru,

1- Why choice A is wrong? and how to negate a choice with comparison like choice A ?
2-Can you shed light about the OA? How can be negated and makes the conclusion fall apart? I don't understand. Isn't B simply restating the first sentence of the argument that It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed ............. before initiating the adoption process. How is it an assumption?

Thanks in advance

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag

GMAT/MBA Expert

Top Reply
Post
Mo2men wrote:
Dear Mitch,

Thanks for you reply. I still have question to understand how the assumption at hand works

1- Does the assumption at hand assume that ' the general population' has same pattern as the 'sample' that was cited in LAST one ( It is true that eight of our last ten babies)
The conclusion is constrained to the case at hand:
Of the 10 babies recently placed with parents, 8 were given to friends of the staff.
The assumption is that the premise (the parents given babies -- including the 8 friends --all far surpassed the agency's criteria) is sufficient to prove the conclusion (the staff did not favor its friends).

Quote:
2- In my early question, Isn't B simply restating the first sentence of the argument that It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed ............. before initiating the adoption process. How is it an assumption?
OA:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
This option refers not to applicants who actually received a baby but only to those who surpassed the criteria and were deemed ELIGIBLE to receive a baby.

Passage:
It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
This statement refers to parents who actually RECEIVED a baby.

The two groups are not the same.
It is likely that many applicants who were ELIGIBLE did not actually RECEIVE a baby.

Quote:
3- I still do not know hothe negation invalidate the conclusion. I believe it supports favoritism. Can you elaborate ?
Consider the following case:
1000 prospective parents apply to adopt a baby.
Of these 1000 applicants, 100 far surpass the criteria and are deemed eligible to receive a baby.
B, negated:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were not personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
The negation of B indicates that a majority of the 100 eligible applicants were NOT friends of the staff.
Then why were most of the babies -- 8 out of 10 -- given to friends?
The implication is that the staff favored its friends when deciding which of the 100 eligible applicants would actually receive a baby, invalidating the conclusion that there was no favoritism in the application process.

_________________
Mitch Hunt
Private Tutor for the GMAT and GRE
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com

If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "UPVOTE" icon.

Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.
For more information, please email me at GMATGuruNY@gmail.com.
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Free GMAT Practice Test How can you improve your test score if you don't know your baseline score? Take a free online practice exam. Get started on achieving your dream score today! Sign up now.

GMAT/MBA Expert

Top Reply
Post
Mo2men wrote:
Dear GMATGuru,

1- Why choice A is wrong? and how to negate a choice with comparison like choice A ?
2-Can you shed light about the OA? How can be negated and makes the conclusion fall apart? I don't understand. Isn't B simply restating the first sentence of the argument that It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed ............. before initiating the adoption process. How is it an assumption?

Thanks in advance
Premise:
All of the applicants given babies far surpassed the adoption criteria.
Conclusion:
In placing 8 of the 10 babies with friends, the staff was not guilty of favoritism.

Apply the NEGATION TEST.
When the correct answer is negated, the conclusion will be invalidated.

B, negated:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were not personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
In other words:
Most of the viable applicants were not friends of the staff.
Given this information, one would expect that most of the babies would be placed with applicants who were not friends of the staff.
Implication:
In giving 80% of the babies to FRIENDS, the staff WAS guilty of favoritism -- a clear invalidation of the conclusion.
Since the negation of B invalidates the conclusion, B is an assumption: a statement that MUST BE TRUE for the conclusion to hold.

The correct answer is B.

A, negated:
The agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have, in general, been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.
In other words:
Babies placed with friends have had better outcomes than babies placed with non-friends.
This information SUPPORTS the conclusion that the agency did not show favoritism in placing most of the babies with friends.
Since the negation of the correct answer must invalidate the conclusion, eliminate A.

_________________
Mitch Hunt
Private Tutor for the GMAT and GRE
GMATGuruNY@gmail.com

If you find one of my posts helpful, please take a moment to click on the "UPVOTE" icon.

Available for tutoring in NYC and long-distance.
For more information, please email me at GMATGuruNY@gmail.com.
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Free GMAT Practice Test How can you improve your test score if you don't know your baseline score? Take a free online practice exam. Get started on achieving your dream score today! Sign up now.
Post
Option A - INCORRECT.
According to the statement of the Adoption Agency Representative, and without any contrary statement from parents who are unacquainted with the staff about favoritism of placement of babies, then it is indeed truthful to say that the agency's prior placements of babies with parents who were previously acquainted with its staff have been more successful than those with parents unacquainted with the staff.

Option B - CORRECT.
This option is best suitable to adopt as an assumption to which the agency representative argument is based on. After a scrutinized meditation of the representative claim, it is obvious that before the agency gives out a baby for adoption, definitely the parent has gone through series of examination, testing , visiting, mental and physical checkup capability to be sure of accurate parenting of the adopted child before handling over. However, parents who were previously acquainted with the staff of the agency before beginning the application process will be having an edge over others because, their friendly relationship with the staff would have granted them vital information about the rules, regulation and procedures about the adoption process which indeed will seem as favoritism in the sight of those who are not acquainted with the staffs prior before adoption of a child. Therefore, it is possible for parents with acquaintance with staff to surpassed the adoption criteria set both by the law and by own policy.

Option C - INCORRECT.
This option has decided to checkmate the period at which the eight babies and the tenth babies were adopted without stating the reasons behind the difference in number and period which the adoption has taken place.

Option D - INCORRECT.
Actually, it is reasonable to say that most prospective parents who apply to adopt babies do not meet the agency's criteria for adoption because they don't have prior knowledge of the procedure processes and requirement needed for baby grant.

Option E - INCORRECT.
This option is justifying the claim of the adoption agency representative claim of not in a business of favoritism. According to the claim of the representative, the agency will only place babies with parents who not only meet the legal and institutional criteria for adoption, but also surpass those criteria for adoption procedures.

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Legendary Member Default Avatar
Joined
25 Sep 2015
Posted:
618 messages
Followed by:
5 members
Upvotes:
14
Post
GMATGuruNY wrote:
Mo2men wrote:
Dear GMATGuru,

1- Why choice A is wrong? and how to negate a choice with comparison like choice A ?
2-Can you shed light about the OA? How can be negated and makes the conclusion fall apart? I don't understand. Isn't B simply restating the first sentence of the argument that It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed ............. before initiating the adoption process. How is it an assumption?

Thanks in advance
Premise:
All of the applicants given babies far surpassed the adoption criteria.
Conclusion:
In placing 8 of the 10 babies with friends, the staff was not guilty of favoritism.

Apply the NEGATION TEST.
When the correct answer is negated, the conclusion will be invalidated.

B, negated:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were not personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
In other words:
Most of the viable applicants were not friends of the staff.
Given this information, one would expect that most of the babies would be placed with applicants who were not friends of the staff.
Implication:
In giving 80% of the babies to FRIENDS, the staff WAS guilty of favoritism -- a clear invalidation of the conclusion.
Since the negation of B invalidates the conclusion, B is an assumption: a statement that MUST BE TRUE for the conclusion to hold.
The correct answer is B.
Dear Mitch,

Thanks for you reply. I still have question to understand how the assumption at hand works

1- Does the assumption at hand assume that ' the general population' has same pattern as the 'sample' that was cited in LAST one ( It is true that eight of our last ten babies)
2- In my early question, Isn't B simply restating the first sentence of the argument that It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed ............. before initiating the adoption process. How is it an assumption?
3- I still do not know how the negation invalidate the conclusion. I believe it supports favoritism. Can you elaborate ?

Thanks in advance

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
Legendary Member Default Avatar
Joined
25 Sep 2015
Posted:
618 messages
Followed by:
5 members
Upvotes:
14
Post
GMATGuruNY wrote:
Mo2men wrote:
Dear Mitch,

Thanks for you reply. I still have question to understand how the assumption at hand works

1- Does the assumption at hand assume that ' the general population' has same pattern as the 'sample' that was cited in LAST one ( It is true that eight of our last ten babies)
The conclusion is constrained to the case at hand:
Of the 10 babies recently placed with parents, 8 were given to friends of the staff.
The assumption is that the premise (the parents given babies -- including the 8 friends --all far surpassed the agency's criteria) is sufficient to prove the conclusion (the staff did not favor its friends).

Quote:
2- In my early question, Isn't B simply restating the first sentence of the argument that It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed ............. before initiating the adoption process. How is it an assumption?
OA:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
This option refers not to applicants who actually received a baby but only to those who surpassed the criteria and were deemed ELIGIBLE to receive a baby.

Passage:
It is true that eight of our last ten babies have been placed with parents who were personally acquainted with at least one of our staff members before initiating the adoption process.
This statement refers to parents who actually RECEIVED a baby.

The two groups are not the same.
It is likely that many applicants who were ELIGIBLE did not actually RECEIVE a baby.

Quote:
3- I still do not know hothe negation invalidate the conclusion. I believe it supports favoritism. Can you elaborate ?
Consider the following case:
1000 prospective parents apply to adopt a baby.
Of these 1000 applicants, 100 far surpass the criteria and are deemed eligible to receive a baby.
B, negated:
Of those prospective parents who substantially surpassed the criteria for adoption, most were not personally acquainted with agency staff before beginning the application process.
The negation of B indicates that a majority of the 100 eligible applicants were NOT friends of the staff.
Then why were most of the babies -- 8 out of 10 -- given to friends?
The implication is that the staff favored its friends when deciding which of the 100 eligible applicants would actually receive a baby, invalidating the conclusion that there was no favoritism in the application process.
Thanks a lo, Mitch for great explanation. Now you made it easy Smile

  • +1 Upvote Post
  • Quote
  • Flag
  • Varsity Tutors
    Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
    Register now and save up to $200

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Varsity Tutors
  • EMPOWERgmat Slider
    1 Hour Free
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    EMPOWERgmat Slider
  • Veritas Prep
    Free Veritas GMAT Class
    Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Veritas Prep
  • Economist Test Prep
    Free Trial & Practice Exam
    BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Economist Test Prep
  • PrepScholar GMAT
    5 Day FREE Trial
    Study Smarter, Not Harder

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    PrepScholar GMAT
  • Magoosh
    Magoosh
    Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Magoosh
  • Kaplan Test Prep
    Free Practice Test & Review
    How would you score if you took the GMAT

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Kaplan Test Prep
  • Target Test Prep
    5-Day Free Trial
    5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    Target Test Prep
  • The Princeton Review
    FREE GMAT Exam
    Know how you'd score today for $0

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    The Princeton Review
  • e-gmat Exclusive Offer
    Get 300+ Practice Questions
    25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE

    Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

    MORE DETAILS
    e-gmat Exclusive Offer

Top First Responders*

1 fskilnik@GMATH 74 first replies
2 Jay@ManhattanReview 49 first replies
3 Brent@GMATPrepNow 47 first replies
4 GMATGuruNY 43 first replies
5 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma... 36 first replies
* Only counts replies to topics started in last 30 days
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members

Most Active Experts

1 image description fskilnik@GMATH

GMATH Teacher

195 posts
2 image description Scott@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

183 posts
3 image description Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

123 posts
4 image description Max@Math Revolution

Math Revolution

89 posts
5 image description GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

87 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts