Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 20 Jan 2017, 23:32

### 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

# Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 145
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 0

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2006, 17:43
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents earned doctorates are more likely to earn a doctorate than children whose parents did not earn doctorates.

Hart: But consider this: Over 70 percent of all doctorate holders do not have a parent that also holds a doctorate.

Which of the following is the most accurate evaluation of Hartâ€™s reply?

A) It establishes that Choiâ€™s claim is an exaggeration.
B) If true, it effectively demonstrates that Choiâ€™s claim cannot be accurate.
C) It is consistent with Choiâ€™s claim.
D) It provides alternative reasons for accepting Choiâ€™s claim.
E) It mistakes what is necessary for an event with what is sufficient to determine that the event will occur.
If you have any questions
New!
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2004
Posts: 497
Location: Europe
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2006, 20:15
'B' it is.
VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1134
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2006, 23:35
Another one for B.

I was confused b/w B and E
E. It mistakes what is necessary for an event with what is sufficient to determine that the event will occur.

Hart does not state that having a parent who is a doctorate is sufficient to get a doctorate. Thus B.
Intern
Joined: 23 Feb 2006
Posts: 39
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2006, 00:48
I go for C.
Argument says that let's say 5 out of 10 would be D(doctor) (50% probability) from those whose parents are D and 400 out of 1000 (40% prob)of those whose parents aren't. Finally we have 405 D of whom obviously much more that 70% don't have parents D.
Director
Joined: 24 Oct 2005
Posts: 659
Location: London
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2006, 01:30
I feel that Hart's statement has nothing to do with what Choi said.
Choi just said that if my parent is a doctor, then, I am more likely to be a doctor as well. But Hart's statement has nothing to do with what Choi said.

A) It establishes that Choiâ€™s claim is an exaggeration. - it does not
B) If true, it effectively demonstrates that Choiâ€™s claim cannot be accurate. - not necessarily
C) It is consistent with Choiâ€™s claim. -
D) It provides alternative reasons for accepting Choiâ€™s claim. - no alternate reason provided
E) It mistakes what is necessary for an event with what is sufficient to determine that the event will occur.- the event was not necessary here.

So, by POE I choose C. If there was a statement that Hart's statement has o effect on Choi's statement, I would choose that.
VP
Joined: 29 Apr 2003
Posts: 1403
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2006, 02:10
I will choose C... Whats the OA?

I think I saw this in one of the LSAT paper!
Manager
Joined: 30 Jan 2006
Posts: 145
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Apr 2006, 08:47
kandid wrote:
I go for C.
Argument says that let's say 5 out of 10 would be D(doctor) (50% probability) from those whose parents are D and 400 out of 1000 (40% prob)of those whose parents aren't. Finally we have 405 D of whom obviously much more that 70% don't have parents D.

OA is C.

This CR tests your understanding of numbers and scope shifts.

OE:
Whenever we see statements like more likely in CR we have to remember that it is testing some form of probability. So what Choi is saying is not that the children of doctors are guaranteed to earn doctorates, nor does he claim that they are likely to earn doctorates. He simply says that they are more likely (a higher probability) to receive a doctorate than those who do not have a parent with doctorates.

So if you pick numbers, as kandid has done above, you'll see that Hart's stmnt is actually consistent with Choi's claim.
05 Apr 2006, 08:47
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
35 Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents 11 13 Jun 2013, 03:48
3 Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents 9 22 Aug 2010, 23:28
6 Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents 22 23 May 2010, 18:31
1 Choi : all other factors being equal, children whose parents 11 09 Nov 2008, 02:48
65 Choi: All other factors being equal, children whose parents 68 19 Jul 2008, 06:53
Display posts from previous: Sort by