Critical Reasoning

Here is an LSAT problem that is a good example of the type of problem that converts well to the GMAT. It is a major question type and it can be addressed using LSAT techniques.

After some discussion, I will post the OA and analyze this question showing the steps to use when attacking a weaken question.

"24. Appliance dealer: Appliance manufacturers commonly modify existing models without giving the modified versions new model names. Some people have complained that this practice makes it impossible for consumers to be certain that the appliance they are about to purchase is identical to the one they may have seen at a neighbor's or read about in a consumer magazine. Yet many manufacturers' modifications to existing models are invariably improvements that benefit the buyer. Therefore, consumers have little reason to object to this practice.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the dealer's argument?

(A) Appliances are generally purchased with the expectation that they will continue to be used for several years.

(B) Appliances usually carry a model number that provides substantially more detailed information about the product
than does the model name.

(C) Appliance manufacturers frequently sell identical products under several different model names.

(D) Improved versions of appliances typically become available before vendors have stopped selling the older versions of the appliance with the same model name.

(E) The high cost of product advertising makes appliance manufacturers generally reluctant to change model names to reflect modifications to their products.

Source: Official LSAT from June 2000, question 24 of section 3. Question found in "The Next 10 Actual , Official PrepTests" copyright Law School Admissions Council, 2004, page 94.

If you have not tried the other LSAT questions in this series of questions they are at the following links.
https://www.beatthegmat.com/lsat-problem ... tml#316526
https://www.beatthegmat.com/lsat-problem ... tml#317459
https://www.beatthegmat.com/lsat-questio ... tml#319855

If you have questions about using the LSAT to study GMAT Critical Reasoning you can refer to this post:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/lsat-to-stud ... tml#315876

Option D explains why there is even a problem --- the impossibility to tell one product (original) from another (modified) under the same model no. This option precludes the possibility of sales of all original products and then all modified products happening sequentially in phases. If there are sequential sales - i.e., all originals of a model have been sold off first and only the modified versions are in stock, then the consumer would still be unable to tell whether the "improved" product he/she is looking at in the shop is the same as the one he/she saw in the magazine. However, since the improved product is better for the consumer, the dealer gets to say: You, consumer, have no reason to worry about lack of model names for modified products as you are only getting a improved product which is the only thing in stock (all the originals have been sold off). ---> effect: dealer is right.

But if d is true then, there may be originals and modified products in stock at the same time. effect ----> consumer has a problem because of the impossibility to tell one product from another. He may simply pick the original and not the modified product. Thus, the lack of a model name for the modified product may NOT benefit the consumer as he may get a product without the improvements by chance and there is "reason" for the consumer to object to the lack of names...

Summary:

D in a way tells us that there is even an 'impossibility to differentiate products' problem in the first place... Here d is "true" as the instructions to the question tell us that is the case.... the passage is the one that may be suspect. D 'weakens' in a weird way by telling us that sales of original and modified does not happen in sequence...

My only issue with this problem is: If consumer A came looking for model X that he thinks has Y features. Then he really expects to get those Y features. If in the shop he picks up the original with Y features and by chance doesn't pick up the modified one with Y+1 features, even then he is not really at a loss and has little reason to complain. He got what he wanted!

The other options really don't seem to work...

I would go go for D.
D says that if the new improved product comes into the market before the stock of the old product is finished, then below case might happen.
I see a juicer recently purchased by my neighbor.The juicer has many advanced features. I ask her the model no.Then I go to a shop & ask for the same model.Since the shop will have both old & new models & in case the shopkeeper gives me an old model with no advance features.This really weakens the dealer's argument

I would go for D.


Reason: This option talks about a possible conflict that dealers might continue to sell appliances without improvement to clear their stock.

OA is D.

Nice work by the crew above, gmat1011, prachich1987, gmatjeet.

This one is a little sneaky because you think that the consumer will get the extra features, GMAT1011 was working with this thought I think...I was actually anticipating when I read this that the newer model will be made of plastic while the older one is stainless steel or some other reason why you do not want to have the new features. But what we can say is what prachich1987 says, namely you see the newest model reviewed in the magazine or you see your neighbor with the newest model and the older model is in the shop.

Here is my procedure for attacking a weaken question:

1) Read the question stem first and see that it is a weaken question. This tells me that there is a main conclusion to this argument. That is what I will try to weaken.

2) Read the entire stimulus taking in what is said in general and understanding the general scope and flow of the argument, but really looking to identify the main conclusion.

3) Use signal words or other techniques to identify the conclusion. In this case the conclusion is "Therefore, consumers have little reason to object to this practice (of giving new models the same name as existing models)."

4) Next, I look for the MIP. This is my own terminology, it means "Most Important Premise." Usually on the GMAT there is one important premise that is essential to focus on. The other information is often background information that just helps you to understand the scope and flow of the argument. In this case the MIP is "Yet many manufacturers' modifications to existing models are invariably improvements that benefit the buyer."

5) So now we have really the entire argument broken down: MIP leads to conclusion. In this case, we are trying to weaken so we want to say that the MIP does not necessarily lead to the conclusion. So we are saying that "Just because manufacturers' modifications to existing models are invariably improvements that benefit the buyer does not mean that consumers have no reason to object." In other words, when I go the answer choices I am focusing on the opposite of the conclusion, I want to find a choice that says that consumers have some reason to object to the practice of giving the same name to new models.

So this leads us to answer choice D. it is a little unexpected, but it gives a reason why consumers would object. Namely, they see the new model but get the older one.