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 Your Progress
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Grab 20% off any Target Test Prep GMAT Focus plan during our Flash Sale. Just enter the coupon code FLASH20 at checkout to save up to $320. The offer ends soon.
More and more TTP students are earning 100th percentile scores on the GMAT Focus Edition. The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in your preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way you should study.
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
With brand new features like:AI-driven Planner tool, 850+ data Insights practice questions and GMAT Focus Edition Adaptive mock tests with ESR+ analysis and personal mentor support, our course is the most comprehensive course for GMAT Focus Edition.
Join us in a comprehensive talk about the F1 Student Visa process with, Travis Feuerbacher, former U.S. Visa Officers and licensed U.S. immigration attorney having expertise working for the U.S. Department of State....
A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of
[#permalink]
21 Oct 2007, 16:56
Show timer
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0%
(00:00)
correct
0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 1
sessions
HideShow
timer Statistics
A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of people who had graduated from college in 1985 found an interesting relationship between income and educational attainement: Participants who had completed doctoral or post-doctoral work earned less, in 2005, than did those people who had only completed master's degrees. On the basis of these findings, a prominent essayist contended that obtaining educatio beyond a master's degree had thereby lowered the participants' 2005 incomes.
Which of the following is an assumption made by the essayist?
A) Those who had only completed doctoral work had a higher average income in 2005 than did those who had also completed post-doctoral work.
B) For each year between 1985 and 2005, the average income of those who had, by 2005, earned a doctorate was lower than that of those who had, by 2005, earned only a master's degree.
C) The 2005 average income of those with no graduate training was lower than that of those who had completed doctoral or post-doctoral work.
D) Working in less lucrative fields such as educatio did not lead people to obtain doctoral or post-doctoral education.
E) Those who had earned master's degrees did not enter the teaching profession.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Throw it away, maybe not the strategies but definetely the wannabe problems. Study from Official LSAT or GMAT questions. They are muc more straight forward.
Re: A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of
[#permalink]
21 Oct 2007, 19:43
well heres the explanation in the book for why b is wrong and why d is right. i dont understand it though.
B) The argument does not need to make assumptions about incomes prior to 2005, since its conclusion focuses on 2005 incomes.
D) Correct. The essayist's argument must assume that alternative causal explanations, specifically the reverse cause-effect relationship, cannot account for the low wages of those who had earned doctorates.
Re: A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of
[#permalink]
21 Oct 2007, 20:43
jimjohn wrote:
well heres the explanation in the book for why b is wrong and why d is right. i dont understand it though.
B) The argument does not need to make assumptions about incomes prior to 2005, since its conclusion focuses on 2005 incomes.
D) Correct. The essayist's argument must assume that alternative causal explanations, specifically the reverse cause-effect relationship, cannot account for the low wages of those who had earned doctorates.
This is of the kind - alternative causal relationship.
A --> B so you have to eliminate the possibility of
B-->A
So if getting a higher ed --> caused them to earn lower income
so its not the less lucrative field --> drove them to get higher ed.
Re: A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of
[#permalink]
21 Oct 2007, 20:45
jimjohn wrote:
well heres the explanation in the book for why b is wrong and why d is right. i dont understand it though.
B) The argument does not need to make assumptions about incomes prior to 2005, since its conclusion focuses on 2005 incomes.
D) Correct. The essayist's argument must assume that alternative causal explanations, specifically the reverse cause-effect relationship, cannot account for the low wages of those who had earned doctorates.
D is a horrible answer just like almost every answer MGMAT comes up with. MGMAT's CR questions are horrible because they make you assume way to much to get to an answer. For this particular answer you would have to make a couple of assumptions just to be able to assume that this is an assumption. Then once you made all of the assumptions just to make this assumption you could come up with many other reasons to shoot down all of the assumptions. D has nothing to do with a reverse cause and effect relationship. The answer is wrong and the explanation they give is worse.
Dont stress about this one and do like I said and throw the book away. Go buy "The Next 10 LSAT" book, it will give you 500 legitimate CR questions. While your at it buytPowerScores LR Bible.
Re: A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of
[#permalink]
21 Oct 2007, 20:50
JDMBA wrote:
jimjohn wrote:
well heres the explanation in the book for why b is wrong and why d is right. i dont understand it though.
B) The argument does not need to make assumptions about incomes prior to 2005, since its conclusion focuses on 2005 incomes.
D) Correct. The essayist's argument must assume that alternative causal explanations, specifically the reverse cause-effect relationship, cannot account for the low wages of those who had earned doctorates.
D is a horrible answer just like almost every answer MGMAT comes up with. MGMAT's CR questions are horrible because they make you assume way to much to get to an answer. For this particular answer you would have to make a couple of assumptions just to be able to assume that this is an assumption. Then once you made all of the assumptions just to make this assumption you could come up with many other reasons to shoot down all of the assumptions. D has nothing to do with a reverse cause and effect relationship. The answer is wrong and the explanation they give is worse.
Dont stress about this one and do like I said and throw the book away. Go buy "The Next 10 LSAT" book, it will give you 500 legitimate CR questions. While your at it buytPowerScores LR Bible.
obtaining education beyond a master's degree in 1985->lowered the participants' 2005 incomes
lower participants' 2005 incomes->obtain education beyond a master's degree in 1985
Its just wrong. What someone did prior to receiving a degree in 1985 has nothing to do with 2005 salaries.
Negate it and it does nothing to the validity of the argument.
Re: A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of
[#permalink]
22 Oct 2007, 00:01
jimjohn wrote:
A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of people who had graduated from college in 1985 found an interesting relationship between income and educational attainement: Participants who had completed doctoral or post-doctoral work earned less, in 2005, than did those people who had only completed master's degrees. On the basis of these findings, a prominent essayist contended that obtaining educatio beyond a master's degree had thereby lowered the participants' 2005 incomes.
Which of the following is an assumption made by the essayist?
A) Those who had only completed doctoral work had a higher average income in 2005 than did those who had also completed post-doctoral work. ' B) For each year between 1985 and 2005, the average income of those who had, by 2005, earned a doctorate was lower than that of those who had, by 2005, earned only a master's degree.
C) The 2005 average income of those with no graduate training was lower than that of those who had completed doctoral or post-doctoral work.
D) Working in less lucrative fields such as educatio did not lead people to obtain doctoral or post-doctoral education.
E) Those who had earned master's degrees did not enter the teaching profession.
I was contesting b/w B & D but finally picked D because it makes more sense.
Premise: 'Participants who had completed doctoral or post-doctoral work earned less, in 2005, than did those people who had only completed master's degrees.'
Conclusion: Therefore, studying beyond Master's lowered the participants' 2005 incomes.
First thing that flashed across my mind was that the author is assuming that people with a degree higher than an MA, do not chose less lucrative fields. Were this true (that people with higher degrees chose less lucrative fields) the argument would fall apart.
Choice D correctly states that working in fields that pay less led some folks to pursue a higher degree (than MA) in the first place. Therefore, the field, and not the degree is the cause for lesser earnings.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
gmatclubot
Re: A recent study documenting the 2005 incomes of a group of [#permalink]