Based on detailed research and analysis conducted over 20 years, stati

The point behind A is
A human being can use the data but cannot be himself based on sth.
Whether the term to refer human is statisticians or scientists does not matter here. The result is same.
I hope this helps

Here the phrase before the comma is modifying the noun following the comma. Thus, we cannot use 'based' since the statisticians or their existence is not "based" on anything. Rather, the statisticians are "using" some kind of analysis/data to arrive at a conclusion. Thus, clearly C is the correct answer.

This is a particular type of SC question and just while reading, I could predict what is being tested. So was able to arrive at the correct answer in about 10 sec. But of course, I'd strongly recommend that you read the complete statement and all answer choices carefully in the real exam. In fact, I did get one of this type in my actual GMAT - I was surely glad to see it

Thanks a lot suzie for your explanation!!

At least in the initial stages, one should go through the official guides. They can help us to understand basic concepts well. For example, see an OG question cited below.
based-on-accounts-of-various-ancient-writers-scholars-have-80746.html

Based on accounts of various ancient writers, scholars have painted a sketchy picture of the activities of an all-female cult that, perhaps as early as the sixth century B.C., worshipped a goddess known in Latin as Bona Dea, “the good goddess.”

(A) Based on accounts of various ancient writers
(B) Basing it on various ancient writers’ accounts
(C) With accounts of various ancient writers used for a basis
(D) By the accounts of various ancient writers they used
(E) Using accounts of various ancient writers

The correct answer is E.

Hi experts,

Why exactly is E incorrect? Based on the veritas explanation and above, "it" doesn't seem to have a clear referent. However, why can't "it" refer to "conclusion?"

"Basing the conclusion on 20 years of detailed research and analysis, statisticians at NYU have come to the conclusion..." - is this redundant/a circular argument? (i.e., statisticians cannot base a conclusion on X to arrive at that very conclusion?)

Hi Sam

The idea behind an ambiguous antecedent is exactly that - the antecedent, or that noun to which the pronoun refers, is unclear. Yes, it is possible that "it" in option (E) could refer to "conclusion". But this is not obvious and clear. There are other inanimate nouns that "it" could, theoretically, refer to.

In such a scenario, option (E) can still be the correct answer, but only if there is no other answer option without any ambiguous antecedent or any other errors. In this question, we have option (C) which satisfies these criterion and hence is a better answer.

Hope this helps.

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.