kaplan question

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 12:32 am
Thanked: 1 times

kaplan question

by jc114 » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:04 am
Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of seirous complications of influenza, are commonly vaccinated. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spary, is effect for children. However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal spray vaccine as well.
B. The new vaccine uses the same mechnaism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do.
C. The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.
D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
E. The nasal spray vaccine is most effective when administred to adults.
==> I guess D, which is right, but not sure why...i tried using the negation test..hmm

Yorco and Zortech are 2 corporations that employ large numbers of full-time workers who are paid by the hour. Publicly available records indicate that Yorco employs roughly the same number of such hourly wage workers as Zortech does but spends a far highter total sum per year on wages for such workers. Therefore, hourly wages must be higher on average at Yorco than at Zortech, since ____.

A. Zortech spends a higher total sum per year than Yorco does to provide its hourly wage workers with benefits other than wages.
B. the work performed by hourly wage workers at Zortech does not require a significantly higher level of skill than the work performed by hourly wage workers at Yorco does.
C. The proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech.
D. Overtime work, which is paid at a substantially higher rate than work done during the regular work week, is rare at both Yorco and Zortech.
E. the highest hourly wages paid at Yorco are higher than the highest hourly wages paid at Zortech.

I chose E, but the answer is D. E sounds right!
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 789
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 3:51 pm
Location: Silicon valley, California
Thanked: 30 times
Followed by:1 members

Re: kaplan question

by jayhawk2001 » Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:52 pm
jc114 wrote:Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of seirous complications of influenza, are commonly vaccinated. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spary, is effect for children. However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal spray vaccine as well.
B. The new vaccine uses the same mechnaism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do.
C. The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.
D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
E. The nasal spray vaccine is most effective when administred to adults.
==> I guess D, which is right, but not sure why...i tried using the negation test..hmm
The argument start off with adults take injections to combat influenza.
The conclusion is that "no significant public health benefit" would arise
as a result of administering the nasal spray to children.

So, the assumption is that the adults do not contract influenza from
children -- D clearly creates this link.

jc114 wrote: Yorco and Zortech are 2 corporations that employ large numbers of full-time workers who are paid by the hour. Publicly available records indicate that Yorco employs roughly the same number of such hourly wage workers as Zortech does but spends a far highter total sum per year on wages for such workers. Therefore, hourly wages must be higher on average at Yorco than at Zortech, since ____.

A. Zortech spends a higher total sum per year than Yorco does to provide its hourly wage workers with benefits other than wages.
B. the work performed by hourly wage workers at Zortech does not require a significantly higher level of skill than the work performed by hourly wage workers at Yorco does.
C. The proportion of all company employees who are hourly wage workers is significantly greater at Yorco than it is at Zortech.
D. Overtime work, which is paid at a substantially higher rate than work done during the regular work week, is rare at both Yorco and Zortech.
E. the highest hourly wages paid at Yorco are higher than the highest hourly wages paid at Zortech.

I chose E, but the answer is D. E sounds right!
Question says there are N employees in Y and Z. Y spends more on
wages than Z.

So, only 2 things are possible -- number of hours that people work
at Y > Z or hourly wage at Y > Z (or both).

We are asked to prove hourly wage at Y > Z which means that
number of hours should be same -- this includes overtime work.

A and B are out of scope. C violates question stem.
E includes samples of highest hourly paid wages -- we are talking
about average here. So, cannot conclude unless we know precisely
how many people we are talking about.

GMAT Instructor
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2007 10:28 pm

by Princeton Review » Sun Apr 22, 2007 8:56 am
The conclusion of the argument is that there is no significant health benefit from administering the nasal vaccine to kids. The evidence offered is that kids are not at risk from serious complications. The argument is assuming that this is the only problem that could be addressed by the vaccine. D presents another problem: adults, who suffer from serious complications from influenza, primarily get it from kids.

As for the second argument, E doesn't really get it done, because it's only about the highest hourly wages paid. The conclusion of the argument is about the average hourly wages. The highest wages can be different while not affecting the average wags for both.
Matt McIver

Princeton Review Instructor

Legendary Member
Posts: 559
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:29 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:2 members

by Cybermusings » Wed Apr 25, 2007 6:37 am
In the first question...the argument states that since influenza doesnt have a significant impact on children...it wont make sense to use the nasal spray on children...

However, if we overlook the children which go on to infect adults with the influenza virus, then we are overlooking a significant danger...so the argument asumes that the influenza contracted by the adults has no linkage to children...

Hence D

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 7:13 am
Location: India
Thanked: 22 times
Followed by:7 members
GMAT Score:540

by sahilchaudhary » Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:17 am
Thanks for the explanation...
Sahil Chaudhary
If you find this post helpful, please take a moment to click on the "Thank" icon.
https://www.sahilchaudhary007.blocked

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2095
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pm
Thanked: 1443 times
Followed by:247 members

by ceilidh.erickson » Fri Sep 27, 2013 7:00 am
In the future, please post just one question per thread. It makes it easier for people to find and reply to threads. Thanks!
Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2013 9:00 am
Location: West Virginia
Thanked: 9 times

by Java_85 » Fri Sep 27, 2013 2:21 pm
IMO D.