undermines the conclusion

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 185
Joined: 04 Feb 2010
Thanked: 6 times

undermines the conclusion

by gmatnmein2010 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:41 pm
Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and national offices were about as likely to win as men. However, only about fifteen percent of the candidates for these offices were women. Therefore, the reason there are so few women who win elections for these offices is not that women have difficulty winning elections but that so few women want to run.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion given?
(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents who won reelection.
(B) Few women who run for state and national offices run against other women.
(C) Most women who have no strong desire to be politicians never run for state and national offices.
(D) The proportion of people holding local offices who are women is smaller than the proportion of people holding state and national offices who are women.
(E) Many more women than men who want to run for state and national offices do not because they cannot get adequate funding for their campaigns.

My ans was C but I am wrng again y????

LSAT

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2109
Joined: 19 Apr 2009
Location: New Jersey
Thanked: 109 times
Followed by:79 members
GMAT Score:640

by money9111 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:50 pm
Well the conclusion is that because so few women want to run.... this explains why there are so few women who win elections. If i'm reading this correctly. So which statement undermines this conclusion?

I don't think it's A, C, D, or E. I'm going to go with B.

What's the correct answer?
My goal is to make MBA applicants take onus over their process.

My story from Pre-MBA to Cornell MBA - New Post in Pre-MBA blog

Me featured on Poets & Quants

Free Book for MBA Applicants


User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Tue Feb 09, 2010 11:08 pm
Conclusion: the reason there are so few women who win elections for these offices is that few women want to run.
To weaken it we need to show that there is another reason few women who win elections
a)it's a kind of shift of scope(refer Kaplan) ans here its talking about REELECTION
b)irrelevant
c)supports the conclusion , as it says that few women desired to run for election

d) its discussing a diff group of people shift of scope

e) bingo yes it gives another reason for explaining that y few women are winning its bcoz of less fund for campaign

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 578
Joined: 25 Aug 2009
Thanked: 136 times
Followed by:62 members

by KapTeacherEli » Thu Feb 11, 2010 7:53 pm
thepheonix is right--it's a shift scope.

The key is that the conclusion introduces a term mentioned nowhere in the evidence: what women "want." Our evidence merely discusses what women do in reality; the author isn't actually backing up his claim about the desire to run with anything directly relating to that.

So, we fill in the gaps. We identify the assumption, the data that must be true but that the author omits, and work from there. In this case, for women the smaller number of woman candidates to prove that a smaller number want to be candidates, we must assume that there are no other reasons for the smaller number of female candidates.

We're trying to undermine the conclusion--and on the GMAT, that means undermine the assumption that the conclusion relies on. So which answer choice undermines the assumption that there is no reason, aside from lack of desire, to explain the lack of female candidates (and therefore lack of female politicians?) (E), which provides a completely different reason for the lack of candidates.
Eli Meyer
Kaplan GMAT Teacher
Cambridge, MA
www.kaptest.com/gmat

ImageImageImage

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: 01 Jan 2010
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

by komal » Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:09 am
Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and national offices were about as likely to win as men. However, only about fifteen percent of the candidates for these offices were women. Therefore, the reason there are so few women who win elections for these offices is not that women have difficulty winning elections but that so few women want to run.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion given?
(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents who won reelection.
Incorrect : Issue here is not re-election. Eliminated.

(B) Few women who run for state and national offices run against other women.
Incorrect : Issue is not Who v/s Who .... Issue is why women have difficulty winning.

(C) Most women who have no strong desire to be politicians never run for state and national offices.
Incorrect : Does not help to undermine the conclusion that women have difficulty winning.

(D) The proportion of people holding local offices who are women is smaller than the proportion of people holding state and national offices who are women.
Incorrect : This is irrelevant to the scope of the argument.

(E) Many more women than men who want to run for state and national offices do not because they cannot get adequate funding for their campaigns.
Correct : This undermines the conclusion by giving another cause (lack of funds) for the stated effect (difficulty for women in winning)

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Followed by:1 members

by iamharish » Mon Nov 15, 2010 2:13 am
(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents who won reelection.
[Correct: Re-elections are still elections. And we can see here that smaller women proportion actually won. Hence weakens the conclusion.]
(B) Few women who run for state and national offices run against other women.
[Incorrect: No issue of winning loosing here at all]
(C) Most women who have no strong desire to be politicians never run for state and national offices.
[Incorrect: It actually in some way strengthens the argument by quoting lack of desire]
(D) The proportion of people holding local offices who are women is smaller than the proportion of people holding state and national offices who are women.
[Incorrect: Not relevent]
(E) Many more women than men who want to run for state and national offices do not because they cannot get adequate funding for their campaigns.
[Incorrect: Strengthens the argument]

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 58
Joined: 22 Oct 2010
Location: Bhopal
Thanked: 1 times
GMAT Score:710

by mk101 » Mon Nov 22, 2010 6:26 pm
The statement relates women not winning elections to their desire of running for the elections.

A. incorrect -out of scope..talks about reelections and hence cant be the right answer. Moreover, this option talks about onyl one year, i.e. last year- we can not generalise any thing from last years data alone

B. Incorrect - talking about women wanting or not wanting to run against other women - out of scope of the argument again.

C. Incorrect - This option is merely a reproduction of the idea mentioned in the passage itself.

D. Incorrect - this is not concerned with the argument.

E. correct - this option correctly tells us a difficulty experienced by women in running for elections and hence ultimately winning elections.
gmatnmein2010 wrote:Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and national offices were about as likely to win as men. However, only about fifteen percent of the candidates for these offices were women. Therefore, the reason there are so few women who win elections for these offices is not that women have difficulty winning elections but that so few women want to run.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion given?
(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents who won reelection.
(B) Few women who run for state and national offices run against other women.
(C) Most women who have no strong desire to be politicians never run for state and national offices.
(D) The proportion of people holding local offices who are women is smaller than the proportion of people holding state and national offices who are women.
(E) Many more women than men who want to run for state and national offices do not because they cannot get adequate funding for their campaigns.

My ans was C but I am wrng again y????

LSAT

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 123
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:4 members

by anirudhbhalotia » Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:17 am
I am not sure between A and E.

But seeing the replies, it seems E is the correct answer?

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 16
Joined: 30 Nov 2010

by kt00381n » Tue Dec 07, 2010 7:00 pm
E for sure, since undermines conclusion

User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
GMAT Score:510

by aardvax » Wed Dec 15, 2010 7:26 am
Conclusion :
the reason there are so few women who win elections for these offices is not that women have difficulty winning elections but that so few women want to run.

E states that many women want to run however
because they cannot get adequate funding for their campaigns they do not..(so women who run, might have difficulty in winning the elections also)
It can be an alternate reason for their low winning numbers.

Therefore E is the answer.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 152
Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:2 members

by artistocrat » Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:58 pm
The conclusion is that women don't WANT to run for office. Choice E tells us that women WANT to but cannot.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 752
Joined: 12 Sep 2010
Thanked: 20 times
Followed by:10 members
GMAT Score:700

by prachich1987 » Fri Dec 17, 2010 12:11 am
What's the OA????

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 181
Joined: 04 Sep 2009
Thanked: 17 times
Followed by:1 members

by ikaplan » Fri Dec 17, 2010 1:44 am
I managed to nail this one by following this strategy.

The conclusion states "Therefore, the reason there are so few women who win elections for these offices is not that women have difficulty winning elections but that so few women want to run."

Step 1: Identify the conclusion (because this is a weaken question)
Step 2: this is a cause and effect relationship so try to diagram the conclusion

few women WANT to run ---> few women win

Step 3: look at the diagram and identify a key word here; in our case, the key word is WANT

Step 4: since the argument asks us to weaken the conclusion, find the opposite of the key word- in our case "DO NOT WANT" (if we were asked to strengthen- the key word would be WANT IT MORE THAN WE CAN IMAGINE)

Step 5: look at the answer choices with "DO NOT WANT" in your mind
Step 6: eliminate all answer choices that do not refer to the keyword

Therefore, IMO the correct answer is E.

I hope this helps.

Happy studying to all of you!
"Commitment is more than just wishing for the right conditions. Commitment is working with what you have."

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 406
Joined: 25 Jan 2010
Location: Syracuse, NY
Thanked: 23 times
Followed by:4 members
GMAT Score:740

by tomada » Fri Dec 24, 2010 2:09 pm
The issue is not that women have difficulty winning, which even the author acknowledges.
komal wrote:Last year in the United States, women who ran for state and national offices were about as likely to win as men. However, only about fifteen percent of the candidates for these offices were women. Therefore, the reason there are so few women who win elections for these offices is not that women have difficulty winning elections but that so few women want to run.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion given?
(A) Last year the proportion of women incumbents who won reelection was smaller than the proportion of men incumbents who won reelection.
Incorrect : Issue here is not re-election. Eliminated.

(B) Few women who run for state and national offices run against other women.
Incorrect : Issue is not Who v/s Who .... Issue is why women have difficulty winning.

(C) Most women who have no strong desire to be politicians never run for state and national offices.
Incorrect : Does not help to undermine the conclusion that women have difficulty winning.

(D) The proportion of people holding local offices who are women is smaller than the proportion of people holding state and national offices who are women.
Incorrect : This is irrelevant to the scope of the argument.

(E) Many more women than men who want to run for state and national offices do not because they cannot get adequate funding for their campaigns.
Correct : This undermines the conclusion by giving another cause (lack of funds) for the stated effect (difficulty for women in winning)
I'm really old, but I'll never be too old to become more educated.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 19
Joined: 10 May 2010

by pavitkumar » Thu Jan 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Without any doubt, the answer is E!!