BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Attention Deficit Disorder

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 4:38 am
Thanked: 5 times

Attention Deficit Disorder

by finance » Tue May 03, 2011 5:24 am
Attention Deficit Disorder(ADD) is a condition characterized by inability to focus on any topic for a prolonged period of time and is specially common among children five to ten years old. A recent study has shown that 85% of seven-year old children with ADD watch, on average, more than five hours of TV a day. It is therefore very likely that Ed, age seven, has ADD, since he watches roughly six hours of TV a day.

The argument above is flawed because:
A)cites as a direct causal mechanism a factor that may only be a partial cause of the condition in question
B)fails to indicate the chances of having ADD among seven-year-old children who watch more than five hours of TV a day
C)limits the description of symptoms of ADD to an inability to focus for a prolonged period of time
D)fails to consider the possibility that Ed maybe among the fifteen percent of children who do not watch more than five hours of TV a day.
E)does not allow for other causes of ADD besides TV watching
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue May 03, 2011 5:37 am
IMO E
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue May 03, 2011 5:41 am
OA is B i guess . I dont understand why not E
How do u interpret "besides X". Does it mean "in addition to X " or "Not X , but something other than X "
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:36 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:15 members

by AIM GMAT » Tue May 03, 2011 6:17 am
I would go with B .

The argument concludes on the basis of info :-

Premise 1 = ADD -- 7yrs age , >5hrs TV
Premise 2 = Ed -- 7 yrs , watches 6hrs avg TV

=> Conclusion = Ed , 7 yrs , avg 6 hrs TV HAS ADD.

The conclusion is made on basis of hours of watching TV , so its flawed as it doent give info about the chances of ADD in kids watching more than 5 hrs of TV .

The reason why E if incase not correct might be that , we are evalauting a specific argument which is talking about TV watching hrs and ADD , so we cant consider that more info is not provided , we need not to weaken the argument by telling that other reason might be responsible for causing the ADD , but we need to evaluate whts wring with the written argument.
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue May 03, 2011 6:31 am
AIM GMAT wrote:I would go with B .

The argument concludes on the basis of info :-

Premise 1 = ADD -- 7yrs age , >5hrs TV
Premise 2 = Ed -- 7 yrs , watches 6hrs avg TV

=> Conclusion = Ed , 7 yrs , avg 6 hrs TV HAS ADD.

The conclusion is made on basis of hours of watching TV , so its flawed as it doent give info about the chances of ADD in kids watching more than 5 hrs of TV .

The reason why E if incase not correct might be that , we are evalauting a specific argument which is talking about TV watching hrs and ADD , so we cant consider that more info is not provided , we need not to weaken the argument by telling that other reason might be responsible for causing the ADD , but we need to evaluate whts wring with the written argument.
But Indicating another cause is a valid technique for weakening causation-effect arguments . i agree that we cant bring in information from the answer choices on to the argument
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Tue May 03, 2011 7:28 am
Ed has 'r' because he does 'P' and 'S'

r - ADD
P - picture watching
S - seven

Option E says Ed has 'r' which may not be true... 'P' itself is 85% true

E- brings in false and tricky assumption.
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 4:38 am
Thanked: 5 times

by finance » Tue May 03, 2011 7:33 am
The argument does NOT suggest that watching TV causes ADD. The given relation is correlation, not causation. That's why It can't be E I think. It's B.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue May 03, 2011 9:05 am
HSPA wrote:Ed has 'r' because he does 'P' and 'S'

r - ADD
P - picture watching
S - seven

Option E says Ed has 'r' which may not be true... 'P' itself is 85% true

E- brings in false and tricky assumption.
:) I didnt understand this logic at all . I hate formal logic
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Tue May 03, 2011 5:02 pm
mundasingh123 wrote:
HSPA wrote:Ed has 'r' because he does 'P' and 'S'

r - ADD
P - picture watching
S - seven

Option E says Ed has 'r' which may not be true... 'P' itself is 85% true

E- brings in false and tricky assumption.
:) I didnt understand this logic at all . I hate formal logic
Okay.. All I wanted to say is "We must first know that Ed has ADD disease before looking for other causes of disease"
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Top
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 905
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 1:38 am
Thanked: 378 times
Followed by:123 members
GMAT Score:760

by Geva@EconomistGMAT » Wed May 04, 2011 12:14 am
finance wrote:The argument does NOT suggest that watching TV causes ADD. The given relation is correlation, not causation. That's why It can't be E I think. It's B.
This is the reason why E is not the answer - the argument does not attempt to make the causal link at all, but rather states the correlation between the two facts - if ADD -> 85% watch 5 TV for 5 hours or more, and then attmepts to draw the reverse correlation:

If watch TV for more than 5 hours --> must have ADD.

This reverse correlation cannot be drawn, and the percentage of ADD among tv watchers is a separate correlation that needs to be supplied - which is what B does.
Geva
Senior Instructor
Master GMAT
1-888-780-GMAT
https://www.mastergmat.com
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 3:46 am
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:7 members

by GMATMadeEasy » Wed May 04, 2011 5:47 am
@Geva: I could reach until that the author is shifting from correlation to causation , but didnt hit well on B.
This reverse correlation cannot be drawn, and the percentage of ADD among tv watchers is a separate correlation that needs to be supplied - which is what B does.
So what you are saying is that to be able to infer given cause and effect relation, author has to provide data of people watching TV more 5 hrs and having ADD ? and then we can infer about this boy whether he will be a good fit for GMAT (if not suffering from ADD) :)
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1