Most doctors dismiss male pattern baldness as a problem of heredity.

Here is my take on this question. I hope others may find it useful.


I often talk to my students about the role of linear thinking in the problem-solving process for CR and RC questions. That is, what is the exact argument, and on what pillars or premises may it stand? To knock down the argument, you need to take out a pillar. Here, the new theory in question correlates external factors, such as a stressful urban lifestyle to baldness in males. The evidence (i.e. pillar)? Again, stick to the exact phrasing of the passage: baldness is twice as common among male[s] who live in cities as it is among those who live elsewhere. Thus, in order to weaken this new theory, it is necessary to take into account where bald men live to test whether heredity or external factors may be leading to the condition.

Full confession: That is typically about as far as I go with pre-thinking. I used to do more, but too often, my brainstormed ideas did not fall in line with the responses, and I ended up spending too much time on the questions. For me, linear thinking started to lead to the answers much more efficiently, so I adapted my approach. On to the responses, then, with an eye on disproving what we can, rather than looking to find the one correct response.


Analysis: As others have pointed out, this has nothing to do with what causes baldness, not to mention that it does not take into account where bald men live, a necessary condition to weaken the argument. Red light.


Analysis: Do we have bald men living in large cities here? Yes, we do, at least by extension. If most men in general who are born in large cities live out their days there, then that would include bald men, our target group. This does touch on the evidence cited that, again, baldness is twice as common among male[s] who live in cities.... What are we to make of the part about their reason for staying in those cities, to remain close to their families. This could provide an alternative to what the new theory proposes, namely that a stressful urban lifestyle is causing city-dwelling men to lose their hair. It could be true instead that bald men have offspring who stay close to home and, in turn, pass along their genes for baldness to their offspring, who, if this reason provided at the end of the response holds true, will also likely stay close to home and produce the next generation of bald men. Is this the answer I was expecting? No. Can I find a reason to dismiss it outright? No, I cannot, and that is the crucial part. Yellow light.


Analysis: Ah, the tempting answer. The problem is, the response says nothing about where any of these men live, nor does it offer where they may move to pursue this more restful lifestyle. You cannot assume that the city-dwelling population in the survey or whatever observation has established that city folk versus those from less urban environments comprised mostly men in the 55+ category. Moreover, if you assume that they move away from the city to retire and rest, then why would more bald men be found in the city, by proportion, as opposed to those who live elsewhere? Finally, since when do thoughts dictate where people actually live? I wish I could live in Hawai'i, and I can even dream about it, but that thought will not somehow affect a survey result or an observation about the male population of Hawai'i. At least choice (B) provided an action in addition to the thought. Red light.


Analysis: The evidence cited suggests as much. Read in an altered manner, it says that males who live outside cities have half the rate of baldness as those who live in cities. Of note is that there is a comparison between men who live in cities and those who live outside them, but what is presented does little to weaken the new theory that male pattern baldness can be explained by external factors rather than hereditary factors. Red light.


Analysis: I kind of like the way this one ties into the hereditary notion of reproduction. On the other hand, it does not even attempt to separate the bald men into the two necessary camps of city-dwellers versus non-urbanites. If it deviates from the linear-thinking pathway, then it does not satisfy the given task. This response applies equally to all bald men, regardless of where they live. Red light.

The term process of elimination is bandied about ad nauseam in the tutoring realm, and it means very little until you can connect the strategy to something meaningful. You have to rewire your thinking with these GMAT™ questions and stop looking for the correct answer all the time. Instead of searching for the needle in the haystack, I suggest burning the chaff and finding the needle. Go into these questions with linear thinking in mind, and it becomes easier not to fall for a distraction.

Good luck to all of you in your studies.

- Andrew