A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 18 Jan 2017, 19:42

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3090
Followers: 783

Kudos [?]: 6522 [2] , given: 1012

A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2013, 11:09
2
KUDOS
15
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

38% (02:29) correct 62% (01:29) wrong based on 451 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

(A) it assumes that there can only be one cause for an effect

(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur

(C) it assumes that if a cause for an effect is removed, then the effect will in turn get reversed

(D) it mistakes a symptom for a cause

(E) it is based on unverified and subjective data
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________
If you have any questions
New!
VP
Status: Far, far away!
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Posts: 1123
Location: Italy
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.8
Followers: 181

Kudos [?]: 1963 [0], given: 219

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that so [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2013, 11:33
A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

The problem IMO relies in the red part of the text. In the first part the conclusion of the study is presented, and then it is said that, according to the conclusion, lonely students have a weaker immune system. Before reading the answers it's clear that a weak point is the fact that other factors can contribute to this condition.

IMO B
(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur
It says that a necessary condition ( loneliness) for an event (weak system) is a sufficient condition (no other factors involved).

Waiting for OA...
_________________

It is beyond a doubt that all our knowledge that begins with experience.

Kant , Critique of Pure Reason

Tips and tricks: Inequalities , Mixture | Review: MGMAT workshop
Strategy: SmartGMAT v1.0 | Questions: Verbal challenge SC I-II- CR New SC set out !! , My Quant

Rules for Posting in the Verbal Forum - Rules for Posting in the Quant Forum[/size][/color][/b]

Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3090
Followers: 783

Kudos [?]: 6522 [0], given: 1012

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that so [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2013, 12:39
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Zarrolou wrote:
A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

The problem IMO relies in the red part of the text. In the first part the conclusion of the study is presented, and then it is said that, according to the conclusion, lonely students have a weaker immune system. Before reading the answers it's clear that a weak point is the fact that other factors can contribute to this condition.

IMO B
(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur
It says that a necessary condition ( loneliness) for an event (weak system) is a sufficient condition (no other factors involved).

Waiting for OA...

Hi

here B is wrong because neither is stated explicity nor implied about sufficiency and so on.....

C instead basically says that if you are alone, this scenari leads to an unbalance immune system but if you have the latter is not true that you have the first scenario (loneliness).

OR

Just because the cause is removed does not mean the effect will get reversed. It might remain unchanged.

C is the OA indeed
_________________
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1153
Location: United States
Followers: 259

Kudos [?]: 2867 [3] , given: 123

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that so [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2013, 14:49
3
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
carcass wrote:
A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

(A) it assumes that there can only be one cause for an effect

(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur

(C) it assumes that if a cause for an effect is removed, then the effect will in turn get reversed

(D) it mistakes a symptom for a cause

(E) it is based on unverified and subjective data

Tough question!

This is weaken question.

Premise: social support may strengthen immune system. KEY
Premise: social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system
Conclusion: lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot

Assumption: X helps Y --> no X will weaken Y. It's wrong because social may support strengthen immune system, but it doesn't mean No social support will weaken immune system.

C clearly states this flaw.

Hope it helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.

Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3090
Followers: 783

Kudos [?]: 6522 [3] , given: 1012

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that so [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2013, 15:45
3
KUDOS
pqhai wrote:
carcass wrote:
A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

(A) it assumes that there can only be one cause for an effect

(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur

(C) it assumes that if a cause for an effect is removed, then the effect will in turn get reversed

(D) it mistakes a symptom for a cause

(E) it is based on unverified and subjective data

Tough question!

This is weaken question.

Premise: social support may strengthen immune system. KEY
Premise: social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system
Conclusion: lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot

Assumption: X helps Y --> no X will weaken Y. It's wrong because social may support strengthen immune system, but it doesn't mean No social support will weaken immune system.

C clearly states this flaw.

Hope it helps.

be careful when you say a weaken question and the stem talks about flaw in the reasoning.

Because weaken ----> you weaken the conclusion RELATED to the overll structure of the stimulus. And in weaken category question be careful to weaken only and exclusively the conclusion

In flaw question -----> you weaken directly the assumption. Basically is the contrary of the assumption.

They seem the same thing but need different strategy, though slightly.
_________________
Intern
Joined: 14 Apr 2013
Posts: 44
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 3

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that so [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2013, 21:49
A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

(A) it assumes that there can only be one cause for an effect
Nowhere is this stated or implied so this cant be the answer

(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur
The argument is not saying that loneliness is the necessary condition for a weaker immune system so this choice us also eliminated.

(C) it assumes that if a cause for an effect is removed, then the effect will in turn get reversed
This is closest to the argument in the passage as students who are not isolated (other students) don’t have a weaker response to flu shots.
But this should not mean that if loneliness is removed than the immune system will get ok and hence this is the flaw in the reasoning

(D) it mistakes a symptom for a cause
Cause is isolation and loneliness so this option is not possible.
(E) it is based on unverified and subjective data
Nowhere is it said that the data is unverified.
_________________

Intern
Joined: 06 Mar 2012
Posts: 36
Location: India
GPA: 3.4
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 12

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that so [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Apr 2013, 05:45
carcass wrote:
A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

(A) it assumes that there can only be one cause for an effect

(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur

(C) it assumes that if a cause for an effect is removed, then the effect will in turn get reversed

(D) it mistakes a symptom for a cause

(E) it is based on unverified and subjective data

+1 C
Rephrasing the argument -
A study - 'lonely and socially-isolated students -- > a weaker immune response' provides support for the hypothesis - 'Social support may strengthen people’s immune system' -- clearly indicates the flaw because it assumes that if a cause (social isolation) for an effect (Weak immune system) is removed, then the effect will in turn get reversed

Press +1 Kudos if my post helped
Current Student
Joined: 03 Feb 2013
Posts: 939
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.88
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Followers: 134

Kudos [?]: 841 [0], given: 546

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2014, 06:33
carcass wrote:
A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

(A) it assumes that there can only be one cause for an effect

(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur

(C) it assumes that if a cause for an effect is removed, then the effect will in turn get reversed

(D) it mistakes a symptom for a cause

(E) it is based on unverified and subjective data

The argument is flawed because it assumes there cannot be other reasons which can cause the same effect.

Both A and C says the same. How can C) be OA?
_________________

Thanks,
Kinjal

My Application Experience : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267-40.html#p1516961
Prodigy for Tepper - CMU : http://bit.ly/cmuloan-kd

Manager
Joined: 24 Oct 2013
Posts: 181
Schools: LBS '18
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
WE: Design (Transportation)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 83

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jun 2014, 13:48
kinjiGC wrote:
carcass wrote:
A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that social support may strengthen people’s immune system. This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system. According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students.

The argument is flawed primarily because

(A) it assumes that there can only be one cause for an effect

(B) it assumes that a necessary condition for an event is a sufficient condition for that event to occur

(C) it assumes that if a cause for an effect is removed, then the effect will in turn get reversed

(D) it mistakes a symptom for a cause

(E) it is based on unverified and subjective data

The argument is flawed because it assumes there cannot be other reasons which can cause the same effect.

Both A and C says the same. How can C) be OA?

Argument says 'This study actually found that social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system'

A) it assumes that there can only be one cause for an effect

No, it doesn't assume that in any way. It just says social isolation and loneliness CAN impair the immune system. Whereas, what you are saying would be a paraphrase of 'This study actually found that ONLY social isolation and loneliness can impair the immune system'
Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2013
Posts: 189
Location: United States (NY)
GMAT 1: 640 Q44 V34
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V40
GMAT 3: 720 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.16
WE: Consulting (Venture Capital)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 71

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2014, 11:53
I picked C as it was the closest, but a bit borderline imo. The cause for effect is not only removed, but also reversed (as is the effect). Maybe in logic terms, these two are equivalent...
_________________
Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2014
Posts: 291
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 46

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2014, 02:16
I am confused on why not A. The stem says

According to the findings of the study, lonely and socially-isolated first-year students mounted a weaker immune response to the flu shot than other students

Isn't this assuming that social isolation could be the only cause for these students to have weaker immune response
Manager
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 152
Location: India
WE: Supply Chain Management (Consulting)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 24

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2014, 05:30
Here is my approach.

Lets identify the cause and effect in the argument.

Cause: Social isolation

Effect: Weaker immune system

Based on this cause-effect relationship, the argument concludes that social support strengthens immune system.

So the conclusion basically assumes that if cause is removed (or social support is improved), then the effect will be reversed (immune system will be strengthened).

_________________

+1 KUDOS is the best way to say thanks

"Pay attention to every detail"

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10531
Followers: 918

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Aug 2015, 11:48
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: A new study provides more support for the hypothesis that   [#permalink] 08 Aug 2015, 11:48
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Supporters of a costly new Defense 4 02 Jun 2015, 20:43
5 A study by Consumer Support Center revealed an inverse 11 29 Sep 2013, 15:08
1 The information above provides the LEAST support for which 5 01 Apr 2012, 23:32
9 More and more computer programs that provide solutions to 13 07 Jun 2011, 02:26
1 More and more computer programs that provide solutions to 13 29 May 2008, 15:55
Display posts from previous: Sort by