advise on the process flow and structure!

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

advise on the process flow and structure!

by ssgmatter » Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:09 am
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and waking cycles differ from those of the other partner reveals that such couples share fewer activities with each other and have more violent arguments than do couples in a relationship in which both partners follow the same sleeping and waking patterns. Thus, mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.
(B) The sleeping and waking cycles of individuals tend to vary from season to season.
(C) The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work.
(D) People in unhappy marriages have been found to express hostility by adopting a different sleeping and waking cycle from that of their spouses.
(E) According to a recent study, most people's sleeping and waking cycles can be controlled and modified easily.

i understand this question pretty well and just thought of sharing my explanation:

ok so it is a cause and effect question

mismatched sleeping pattern-->jeopardize marriage

so to weaken this do one of the two things to solve this problem:

-->reverse the cause and effect
-->hunt for alternate cause

in this case D is the reversse the cause and effect......

my question is that is my logic going on the right track or i am really missing out on something here....please share your thoughts guys...
Best-
Amit
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
MBA Student
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:32 pm
Thanked: 98 times
Followed by:22 members

by fibbonnaci » Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:31 am
hey ssgmatter, you have sorted the stimulus pretty well. It is a cause and effect model.
I would like to add few pointers.
When you identify that it is a cause and effect model, u need to keep an eye for 5 things (not just 2 things)
Strengthening case:
1. No alternate cause.[only one cause leads to a desired effect]
2. Cause occurs then effect occurs always.
3. Cause does not occur, then Effect does not occur too.
4. Effect does not lead to cause.
5.Data validation

Weakening case:
1. Presence of alternate cause.
2. Cause occurs, effect does not occur.
3. Cause does not occur, Effect occurs.
4. Effect leads to cause.
5. Data invalidation.

Let me know if you need any further help on this.

Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:43 am
fibbonnaci wrote:hey ssgmatter, you have sorted the stimulus pretty well. It is a cause and effect model.
I would like to add few pointers.
When you identify that it is a cause and effect model, u need to keep an eye for 5 things (not just 2 things)
Strengthening case:
1. No alternate cause.[only one cause leads to a desired effect]
2. Cause occurs then effect occurs always.
3. Cause does not occur, then Effect does not occur too.
4. Effect does not lead to cause.
5.Data validation

Weakening case:
1. Presence of alternate cause.
2. Cause occurs, effect does not occur.
3. Cause does not occur, Effect occurs.
4. Effect leads to cause.
5. Data invalidation.

Let me know if you need any further help on this.
Thankyou fibonacci for completing the process flow.

Just one question in practicality, do we actually use all of them or just the important ones. Please share your thoughts and seasoned advise.
Best-
Amit

User avatar
MBA Student
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:32 pm
Thanked: 98 times
Followed by:22 members

by fibbonnaci » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:04 am
Causual reasoning is an universal fallacy. We really cannot determine the important ones. It all depends on the stimulus and the way the author has structured it. It is always better to be on the look out for all the pointers and pick them up from the options.
This way, no matter how the author twists and turns the stimuli, u can be sure of hitting the answer!

PS: Remember there is no shortcut to success and GMAT is no different.

Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:31 am
fibbonnaci wrote:Causual reasoning is an universal fallacy. We really cannot determine the important ones. It all depends on the stimulus and the way the author has structured it. It is always better to be on the look out for all the pointers and pick them up from the options.
This way, no matter how the author twists and turns the stimuli, u can be sure of hitting the answer!

PS: Remember there is no shortcut to success and GMAT is no different.
Makes sense!....Thankyou!
Best-
Amit

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:24 pm
fibbonnaci wrote:Causual reasoning is an universal fallacy. We really cannot determine the important ones. It all depends on the stimulus and the way the author has structured it. It is always better to be on the look out for all the pointers and pick them up from the options.
This way, no matter how the author twists and turns the stimuli, u can be sure of hitting the answer!

PS: Remember there is no shortcut to success and GMAT is no different.

Fibo !!!And someone there after so many years????

I know u like this particular CR so much ....