Critical Reasoning

akhp77 wrote:I am not getting it.

full scholarships (cause)--> higher grade point (effect)

High grade point averages were not the primary criterion upon which the scholarship awards were based => It could be but How it can be the assumption. I could not understood.

according to "GMAT Critical Reasoning Bible"
In causal reasoning, the correct answer to an assumption question will normally fit one of the following categories.
1. Eliminate an alternative cause for the stated effect
2. Shows that when the cause occurs, the effects occurs
3. Shows that when the cause does not occur, the effect does not occur
4. Eliminates the possibility that the stated relationship is reversed
5. Show that the data used to make the causal statement are accurate, or eliminates possible problems with the data

Explanation from book

Your question is kind of in type 4. eliminating the possibility that the stated relationship is reversed.

For my question, OA=A

why E is wrong for kevin's ques?

If on average cyclists in group A spent 40% more time cycling per week than cyclists did in group B...The likelihood of group A getting into an accident increases...that is my 2 cents

@boazkhan

i agree with you.
one of my mistakes was that i didnt treat all the ans choices as correct. but still im not cleared. can u plz explain what does " Each of the following, if true, either constitutes or counters a valid objection to the argument above EXCEPT " mean?

We conducted a 2-year study of 1000 recreational cyclists, some of whom always wore reflective clothing while cycling (group A). These 1000 cyclists were involved in 600 traffic accidents during the study, and the cyclists who did not always wear reflective clothing while cycling (group B) accounted for 85% of these accidents. The results of our study support our recommendation that cyclists wear reflective clothing to minimize the risk of suffering a traffic accident while practicing this healthy sport.

Each of the following, if true, either constitutes or counters a valid objection to the argument above EXCEPT

(A) The cyclists in group B outnumbered those in group A by a 2 to 1 margin.
(B) Cyclists in group A were much more likely to use bicycle lights and helmets than those in group B.
(C) Cyclists in group B were more likely to cycle on well-lit highways amid other traffic than were cyclists in group A, who generally stuck to bicycle paths that are poorly lit.
(D) Cyclists in group B were no more likely to be stopped for careless driving of a motor vehicle than were those in group A.
(E) On average, cyclists in group A spent 40% more time cycling per week than did cyclists in group B.

Kevin, i normally spend my nights sleeping...and it has worked well for me for 28 yrs, until i ran into this Q last night

I would love u to explain the OA...i am not getting it

Let me run u thru my thots..

Step 1 - Identify the argument - Cyclists wear reflective clothing to minimize the risk of suffering a traffic accident

Step 2 - Understand the Q prompt, it contains an EXCEPT....Look for an option that neither constitutes a valid objection to the argument NOR counters a valid objection to the argument

that's confusing as hell to attack within 2 min...

Constitutes a valid objection (an option that opposes the argument).....and counters a valid objection (an option that agrees with the argument) are opposites of each other....hence the correct answer has to be irrelevant to the argument

Step 3 - Investigate options

B - agrees with the argument
C - Opposes the argument
D - Kinda opposes the argument, by saying group B arent bad riders
A - 90 out of 333 group A ppl met with accidents, while 510 out of 666 group B met with accidents....this one kinda agrees with the argument
E - is irrelevant to the argument..without knowing the exact nos

My choice is E or have i totally lost it????

In the original question I posted, each choice would either constitute or counter an objection, especially if you read A as "only 2 to 1". I have reworded it as follows:


We conducted a 2-year study of 1000 recreational cyclists, some of whom always wore reflective clothing while cycling (group A). These 1000 cyclists were involved in 600 collisions with motor vehicles during the study, and the cyclists who did not always wear reflective clothing while cycling (group B) accounted for 85% of these accidents. The results of our study support our recommendation that cyclists wear reflective clothing to minimize the risk of suffering such a collision while practicing this healthy sport.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument above EXCEPT

(A) The cyclists in group B outnumbered those in group A by a 2 to 1 margin.
(B) Cyclists in group A were much more likely to use bicycle lights and helmets than those in group B.
(C) Cyclists in group B were more likely to cycle on well-lit highways amid other traffic than were cyclists in group A, who generally stuck to bicycle paths that are poorly lit.
(D) Cyclists in group B were more likely to be stopped for careless driving of a motor vehicle than were those in group A.
(E) On average, cyclists in group A maintained their bicycle brakes in much better working order than did those in group B.