A survey of a group

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 435
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 17 times

A survey of a group

by madhur_ahuja » Sun Aug 09, 2009 7:16 pm
A survey of a group of people between the ages of 75 and 80 found that those who regularly played the card game bridge tended to have better short-term memory than those who did not play bridge. It was originally concluded from this that playing bridge can help older people to retain and develop their memory. However, it may well be that bridge is simply a more enjoyable game for people who already have good short-term memory and who are thus more inclined to play.

In countering the original conclusion the reasoning above uses which one of the following techniques?

(A) challenging the representativeness of the sample surveyed

(B) conceding the suggested relationship between playing bridge and short-term memory, but questioning whether any conclusion about appropriate therapy can be drawn

(C) arguing that the original conclusion relied on an inaccurate understanding of the motives that the people surveyed have for playing bridge

(D) providing an alternative hypothesis to explain the data on which the original conclusion was based

(E) describing a flaw in the reasoning on which the original conclusion was based
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 434
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:48 pm
Location: Bangalore
Thanked: 6 times
GMAT Score:600

by viju9162 » Mon Aug 10, 2009 12:44 am
Is the answer "D"?
"Native of" is used for a individual while "Native to" is used for a large group

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 2:50 am

by delhiboy1979 » Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:16 am
I think it should be A. The author does say that the people selected already had a good memory and liked bridge.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:41 am
Thanked: 1 times

by acenikk » Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:36 am
D or E. It seems as an alternative hypothesis to explain the data; also it can be characterized as the flaw in the reasoning. What is OA ?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 197
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 2:47 am
Thanked: 12 times

Re: A survey of a group

by shahdevine » Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:41 am
madhur_ahuja wrote:A survey of a group of people between the ages of 75 and 80 found that those who regularly played the card game bridge tended to have better short-term memory than those who did not play bridge. It was originally concluded from this that playing bridge can help older people to retain and develop their memory. However, it may well be that bridge is simply a more enjoyable game for people who already have good short-term memory and who are thus more inclined to play.

In countering the original conclusion the reasoning above uses which one of the following techniques?

(A) challenging the representativeness of the sample surveyed

(B) conceding the suggested relationship between playing bridge and short-term memory, but questioning whether any conclusion about appropriate therapy can be drawn

(C) arguing that the original conclusion relied on an inaccurate understanding of the motives that the people surveyed have for playing bridge

(D) providing an alternative hypothesis to explain the data on which the original conclusion was based

(E) describing a flaw in the reasoning on which the original conclusion was based
I would go D. it feels like it could very well have been an assumption question where the cause and effect are reversed. in this case its about providing an alternative cause/hypothesis, to explain data.

OA please.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 435
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 17 times

Re: A survey of a group

by madhur_ahuja » Mon Aug 10, 2009 2:42 am
shahdevine wrote:
madhur_ahuja wrote:A survey of a group of people between the ages of 75 and 80 found that those who regularly played the card game bridge tended to have better short-term memory than those who did not play bridge. It was originally concluded from this that playing bridge can help older people to retain and develop their memory. However, it may well be that bridge is simply a more enjoyable game for people who already have good short-term memory and who are thus more inclined to play.

In countering the original conclusion the reasoning above uses which one of the following techniques?

(A) challenging the representativeness of the sample surveyed

(B) conceding the suggested relationship between playing bridge and short-term memory, but questioning whether any conclusion about appropriate therapy can be drawn

(C) arguing that the original conclusion relied on an inaccurate understanding of the motives that the people surveyed have for playing bridge

(D) providing an alternative hypothesis to explain the data on which the original conclusion was based

(E) describing a flaw in the reasoning on which the original conclusion was based
I would go D. it feels like it could very well have been an assumption question where the cause and effect are reversed. in this case its about providing an alternative cause/hypothesis, to explain data.

OA please.
Good explanation. OA is D

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:33 am

by kris77 » Sun May 15, 2016 3:19 pm
I agree with you guys. I also think that the right answer is B