-
Target Test Prep's 2024 GMAT Focus Edition prep is discounted for the BTG community!
Redeem
The Next-Gen GMAT: Two-Part Analysis
You may have already heard that GMATPrep 2.0 has been released. Im pretty excited that we finally have a Mac-compatible program after all, what better way to spend a random Friday night when Im bored? :) Seriously, though, I just tried my first CAT yesterday and Ive got an IR question that I want to share with you.
Note: IR is not adaptive; in other words, were all going to see the same questions when we take the two practice CATs. So, if you havent taken your first GMATPrep 2.0 CAT yet, you might just want to bookmark this article right now and wait. Once youve taken the test, you can come back and read the rest of the article.
One more note: We have an average of 2.5 minutes per question for IR. GMATPrep doesnt report the time we spent on each individual question, but I took just about 2 minutes for this one. (Note: I strongly recommend that you keep track of your per-question timing yourself while you take the test. Find a way to do so easily so that it doesnt distract you while youre taking the test.)
Try the problem
All right, set your timer for 2.5 minutes and go!
Swamp sparrows live in a variety of wetland habitats. Unlike most swamp sparrows, which live in freshwater habitats, the coastal-plain subspecies lives in tidal wetlands, where freshwater and seawater mix and the mud is gray rather than brown. Coastal-plain swamp sparrows differ from all other populations of swamp sparrows in having plumage that is gray brown rather than rusty brown. DNA analysis indicates several important genetic differences between swamp sparrows that inhabit tidal marshes and other subspecies of swamp sparrows. Therefore there must have been genetic-selection pressure on swamp sparrows in tidal marshes to become darker and grayer.Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the argument, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the argument. Make only two selections, one in each column.
(Note: On the real test, the answers arent labeled A through E; I did that to make it easier for us to discuss the answers later.)
Two-Part questions can be very much like critical reasoning questions or like quant questions; they can even be a mix of quant and verbal. This one is a fairly pure CR type. One little trick to figure out quickly what youve got is to look at the headers of the two answer columns. For this problem, the two headers are Strengthen and Weaken, so that (plus a lack of any obvious formulas, numbers, geometry figures, etc.) is a pretty clear sign that weve got a CR subtype, and we already know how to do those! As such, were going to use our 4-step CR process.
Step 1 is to identify the question type so that we know what were looking for. For strengthen and weaken questions, we always have to find the conclusion. If I can brainstorm any assumptions, Ill also note those. To strengthen, we have to find an answer that makes this conclusion a little bit more likely to be valid. To weaken, we have to find an answer that makes this conclusion a little less likely to be valid.
Okay, lets deconstruct the argument (step 2). The first column contains the argument. The second column shows my thoughts as I read that part of the argument. Below the table, I show my actual notes. Anything in [brackets] indicates my own thoughts, not something the argument actually said.
Gen diff must have gen-sel press for color
[No alt reason for diff? Gene only?]
One of the things that I thought while I was reading the argument was that maybe the birds are different colors because the mud is different, and they roll around in the mud or something like that. The author concludes that the color MUST be due to genetic differences so the author is also assuming that there are no other possible causes.
Step 3 is to state the goal. In this case, Im looking for one thing that will make the argument a little more likely to be valid and another thing that will make the argument a little less likely to be valid.
On to step 4: work from wrong to right! You have a couple of options here. You might decide that youre going to look first for whatever Strengthens and then for whatever Weakens (or vice versa). Alternatively, you can go through each answer asking yourself whether it strengthens or weakens. I used the second method myself because I think its pretty much the same thing that we already do on a regular CR question we classify the 5 answers as one of three things: strengthen, weaken or slash (neither strengthen nor weaken). The three symbols are: S, W, /.
(A) None of the genetic differences that have been identified in the genomes of coastal-plain swamp sparrows and freshwater swamp sparrows affect plumage color.
Some genetic differences were found the argument told us that but none (zero!) of those differences have anything to do with color. Does that affect the conclusion? Yes, it makes me wonder on what evidence the author is basing the claim! The evidence given in the first place was that there were genetic differences. The author was implying that some of those differences had to do with color. Now that I know they dont, the authors argument isn't sounding quite so good. This one does seem like its weakening the argument. Put a W label next to A on your scrap paper.
(B) Mud in tidal marshes tends to be grayish because of the presence of iron sulfide, whereas freshwater mud is browner because of the presence of iron oxide.
Oh, hey, maybe this has to do with what I was thinking before maybe the birds are rolling around in the mud and thats why theyre different colors. If so, that would weaken the argument because it would provide another reason, other than genetics, for the color. Hmm. Except this one only talks about why the mud is the color that it is. This choice says nothing about whether the color of the mud somehow affects the color of the birds. This one is a bit tempting, but its not as good as answer A. Label this one a / and eliminate.
(C) Some species of birds that live in tidal marshes do not have gray plumage.
Were only interested in swamp sparrows. This answer choice talks about some species of birds in general that doesnt have to be referring to swamp sparrows at all. Label C a / and eliminate it.
(D) The diets of both coastal-plain and freshwater swamp sparrows can change significantly from season to season.
If the diets change, how does that affect the argument? Lets say that the coastal-plain sparrows eat worms in winter and grubs in summer. That doesnt tell me anything new about what color they are. Ditto for the freshwater sparrows. Label this one a / and eliminate.
(E) Baby birds of the coastal-plain subspecies and baby birds of a freshwater swamp species, all raised on an identical diet under controlled conditions, grew plumage similar in color to that of their respective parents.
Okay, baby birds of the two different subspecies at issue were raised with an identical diet. Each set ended up still having the same color as their parents. This answer is super-tricky and I almost missed the real issue the first time I read this. Remember when we said before that, if the author is right about claiming that there MUST have been some genetic thing going on, then the author is also assuming that there isnt some other cause for the difference in color? Well, one way to strengthen a particular cause-effect conclusion is to eliminate another possible cause for the observed effect.
In this case, the observed effect is different coloring, and the cause, according to the author, was genetic-selection pressure. But what if eating certain kinds of foods affects the color of the birds? If that were true, that would weaken the argument. This choice is telling us that diet does NOT affect the color of the birds, so weve eliminate one possible weakness. That has the roundabout effect of making the conclusion a little bit stronger. Not much but we only need to make it a little bit more likely to be valid.
The correct answers are Strengthen: E and Weaken: A.
Key Takeaways for Two-Part Analysis questions:
(1) Two-Part questions may be more quant-like or more verbal-like. Try to figure out what youve got before you dive in. First, glance at the column headers for the answers. If that doesnt help enough, glance at the question stem (the part that says Select Strengthen for the statement that would).
(2) If youve got a CR subtype, youre good as long as youve studied CR! Do what we always do with CR; just remember that youre going to be asked to pick two answers that do two different things.
(3) If you get a Strengthen / Weaken question, trap answers will fall into the same general categories that we already see on regular CR strengthen and weaken questions. In this case, 3 of the answers will be slashes, one will strengthen and one will weaken. Make sure not to reverse the S and W answers!
* GMATPrep questions courtesy of the Graduate Management Admissions Council. Usage of this material does not imply endorsement by GMAC.
Recent Articles
Archive
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009