CR Misc/Minor Question Types (700-800)

Question

CR: Miscellaneous and Minor Question Types (700-800)  
 1. If, in a tennis tournament, a match reaches a fifth-set tiebreak, the lower-ranked player always loses the tiebreak
(and, therefore, the match). If Rafael, the second-ranked player, wins a tournament by beating Roger, 
the top-ranked player, then the match must not have included a fifth-set tiebreak. Which of the following arguments most
closely mimics the reasoning used in the above argument?

• If a woman with a family history of twins gets pregnant three times, she will have one set of twins. Jennifer, who
falls into this category, had two sets of twins, soshe must not have gotten pregnant exactly three times.
• If a salesman sells more product than anyone else in a calendar year, then he will earn an all-expenses-paid
vacation. Joe earned an all-expense-paid vacation,so he must have sold more product than anyone elsefor the
year.
• A newspaper can charge a 50% premium for ads if its circulation surpasses 100,000; if the circulation does not
pass 100,000, therefore, the newspaper can’t chargeany kind of premium for ads.
• If a student is in the top 10% of her class, she will earn a college scholarship. Anna is not in the top 10% of her
class, so she will not earn a scholarship.
• All of the players on a football team receive a cash bonus if the team wins the Super Bowl. If quarterback Tom
Brady earned a cash bonus last year, he must have been a member of the winning Super Bowl team.

2. Studies show that repeated exposure to an allergen can trigger an allergic person’s defense mechanisms to the
extent that eventually, even minimal exposure to the allergen can provoke a stronger than normal, evenlife-threatening reaction. 
Which of the following is the best analogy for the process by which minimal contact with an
allergen can cause a major reaction?

• People with unhealthy diets are more susceptible todiabetes and high blood pressure.
• Because minor earthquakes can weaken the existing infrastructure in an area, a series of minor earthquakes can
sometimes lead to more damage than a single major earthquake.
• Peanut allergy sufferers should avoid all potentialcontact with peanuts.
• A student who fails a test can still earn a good grade if she works hard for the rest of the semester.
• Drivers who speed regularly are more likely to be caught than those who speed only occasionally.

3. The “Doppler effect” refers to the perceived change in pitch that occurs when the source of a sound is in motion
relative to the observer. For example, the siren ona passing police car will sound higher than its true pitch as the
car approaches, sound the same as its true pitch asthe car passes, and sound lower than its true pitch as the car
travels away from the observer. If two trains pass each other going opposite directions on parallel east-west
tracks, which of the following observations provides another illustration of the effect described above?

• If the eastbound train blows its horn as they pass,passengers on the westbound train will hear a sound that
decreases in pitch.
• If the eastbound train blows its horn as they pass,passengers on the westbound train will hear a sound that
increases in pitch.
• If the eastbound train blows its horn as they pass,passengers on the eastbound train will hear a sound that
decreases in pitch.
• If the eastbound train blows its horn as they pass,passengers on the eastbound train will hear a sound that
increases in pitch.
• If the eastbound train blows its horn as they pass,passengers on the eastbound train will hear a sound that is
steady in pitch.

4. Jim: The United States Mint has recently announced thatthe rising cost of raw copper, nickel, and zinc has pushed
the cost of manufacturing each penny and nickel to more than 1 cent and 5 cents respectively. In addition, there
are very few, if any, items that can be purchased for 5 cents, and virtually none that can be purchased for a penny.
Since it appears that both the penny and the nickelno longer provide a necessary function in today’s economy, I
propose that the government simply stop minting thecoins at a loss and declare the base unit of U.S. currency to
be the dime.
Mary:Don’t be silly. This would mean that all prices would round up to the nearest dime and nobody would go for
that. There is simply no way that Congress would approve, much less consider, such an unpopular measure. In her
response to Jim, Mary does all of the following EXCEPT:

• Makes an assumption about how Jim’s proposal would affect prices.
• Implies that Congressional approval is necessary for Jim’s proposal to take effect.
• Provides a reason why Jim’s proposal would be difficult to implement, regardless of its justification.
• Assumes that Congress will never approve a policy that has little public support.
• Attempts to undermine all or some of the premises upon which Jim justifies his proposal.

5. Owner of JavaJoint: Over the past year, the coffee store has become a daily hang-out for more and more teenagers.
Many of our adult customers do not appear comfortable with this kind of crowd and some of them have told me
that they will no longer stop here for a coffee drink. Since my goal is to maximize our revenue, I want you to
di scourage teenagers from comi ng here and start cul tivating a more adul t crowd.
Store manager: Are you sure? On average, each teenager spends just as much as the average adult does, and we
have far more new customers than we have lost over the past year. The store manager responds to the owner by 
_____
• questioning the veracity of owner’s evidence
• arguing that it would be difficult to implement theowner’s directive
• offering new evidence implying that the status quo is not incompatible with the owner’s goal
• demonstrating that the average teenage customer is as profitable as the average adult customer
• offering new evidence refuting that presented by the owner

6. Garbage in this neighborhood probably will not becollected until Thursday this week. Garbage is usually collected
here on Wednesdays, and the garbage collectors in this city are extremely reliable. However, Monday was a public
holiday, and after a public holiday that falls on aMonday, garbage throughout the city is supposed tobe collected
one day later than usual. The argument proceeds by

• treating several pieces of irrelevant evidence as though they provide support for the conclusion
• indirectly establishing that one thing is likely tooccur by directly ruling out all of the alternative possibilities
• providing information that allows application of a general rule to a specific case
• generalizing about all actions of a certain kind onthe basis of a description of one such action
• treating something that is probable as though it were inevitable

7. Jane: Professor Harper’s ideas for modifying the design of guitars are of no value because there is no general
agreement among musicians as to what a guitar should sound like and, consequently, no widely accepted basis for
evaluating the merits of a guitar’s sound.
Mark: What’s more, Harper’s ideas have had enough time to be adopted if they really resulted in superior sound.
It took only ten years for the Torres design for guitars to be almost universally adopted because of t he improvement
it makes in tonal quality. Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship between Jane’s
argument and Mark’s argument?

• Mark’s argument shows how a weakness in Jane’s argument can be overcome.
• Mark’s argument has a premise in common with Jane’sargument.
• Mark and Jane use similar techniques to argue for different conclusions.
• Mark’s argument restates Jane’s argument in other terms.
• Mark’s argument and Jane’s argument are based on conflicting suppositions.

8. Jorge: You won’t be able to write well about the rock music of the 1960s, since you were just an infant then. Rock
music of the 1960s was created by and for people who were then in their teens and early twenties.

Ruth: Your reasoning is absurd. There are living writers who write well about ancient Roman culture, even though
those writers are obviously not a part of ancient Roman culture. Why should my youth alone prevent me from
writing well about the music of a period as recent as the 1960s? Ruth responds to Jorge’s criticism by

• challenging his claim that she was not in her teensor early twenties during the 1960s
• clarifying a definition of popular culture that is left implicit in Jorge’s argument
• using the example of classical culture in order to legitimize contemporary culture as an object worthyof serious
consideration
• offering an analogy to counter an unstated assumption of Jorge’s argument
• casting doubt on her opponent’s qualification to make judgments about popular culture

9. Anne: Halley’s Comet, now in a part of its orbit relatively far from the Sun, recently flared brightly enough to be
seen by telescope. No comet has ever been observed to flare so far from the Sun before, so such a flare must be
highly unusual.
Sue: Nonsense. Usually no one bothers to try to observe comets when they are so far from the Sun. Thisflare was
observed only because an observatory was tracking Halley’s Comet very carefully. Sue challenges Anne’sreasoning
by

• pointing out that Anne’s use of the term “observed”is excessively vague
• drawing attention to an inconsistency between two of Anne’s claims
• presenting evidence that directly contradicts Anne’s evidence
• offering an alternative explanation for the evidence Anne cites
• undermining some of Anne’s evidence while agreeing with her conclusion

10. Ingrid: Rock music has produced no songs as durable as the songs of the 1940s, which continue to berecorded by
numerous performers.
Jerome: True, rock songs are usually recorded only once. If the original recording continues to be popular, however,
that fact can indicate durability, and the best rock songs will prove to be durable. Jerome responds to Ingrid’s claim
by

• intentionally misinterpreting the claim
• showing that the claim necessarily leads to a contradiction
• undermining the truth of the evidence that Ingrid presents
• suggesting an alternative standard for judging the point at issue
• claiming that Ingrid’s knowledge of the period under discussion is incomplete

souvik101990 · Answer

Better Late than Never Solutions :D

1. On a "mimic the argument" question, it's useful to use logic notation to 
understand the flow of the argument. In this case,we're told that IF A happens 
(a match reaches a fifth-set tiebreak), THEN B willdefinitely happen (the lower-ranked player loses). Standard logic rules tell usthat, when given "If A, then B," 
the only definite conclusion we can draw is "If notB, then not A." In other words, 
if A always leads to B, and B doesn't happen, then A can't have happened either. 
The second sentence of the argument shows this principle: If not B (the lower-ranked player doesn't lose), then not A (there wasn't a fifth-set tiebreak). So we 
need to find another argument that follows this pattern: If A, then B; if not B, then 
not A. 
(A) CORRECT. If A (a woman with a family history of twins gets pregnant 3 
times), then B (she will have 1 set of twins). Note that these numbers are 
precise: if she gets pregnant exactly three times, she will have exactly one set of 
twins. If not B (a woman with a family history of twins has 2 sets of twins - that is, 
not 1), then not A (she must have gotten pregnant either fewer than 3 times or 
more than 3 times - that is, not exactly 3 times). 
(B) If A (a salesman sells more product than anyone else), then B (he will earn 
an all-expenses-paid vacation). If B (Joe earned the trip), then A (he must have 
sold more than anyone else). We can see why logic rules do not include "if B, 
then A" as a logical conclusion: A may always lead to B, but B does not 
necessarily have to lead to A. There may be other ways to earn the trip besides 
selling more than anyone else. 
(C) If A (a newspaper's circulation surpasses 100,000), then B (the newspaper 
can charge a 50% premium). If not A (the circulation doesn't surpass 100,000), 
then not C (the newspaper cannot charge any premium ). The final assertion 
here does not match the initial A / B argument We know nothing about any other 
premium the newspaper might charge; we are only given information about 
charging a 50% premium. 
(D) If A (a student is in the top 10% of the class), then B (she will earn a 
scholarship). If not A (Anna is not in the top 10%), then not B (she won't earn a 
scholarship). We can see why logic rules do not include "if not A, then not B" as 
a logical conclusion: A may always lead to B, but it doesn't have to be the only 
way to reach B. There may be other ways to earn a scholarship besides being in 
the top 10% of the class. 
(E) If A (the team wins the Super Bowl), then B (the players receive a bonus). If 
not A (a player was not on the winning team), then not B (the player won't receive 
a bonus). We can see why logic rules do not include "if not A, then not B" as a 
logical conclusion: A may always lead to B, but it doesn't have to be the only way 
to reach B. There may be other ways to earn a bonus besides winning the Super 
Bowl.

2. A person's immune system becomes hypersensitive to an allergen via repeated 
exposure. We need to find an example of a series ofminor events (repeated 
exposure to an allergen) can ultimately provoke an extreme response (a life-threatening reaction after even minimal exposure tothe allergen). 
(A) In this situation, a behavior (diet) over time leads one to become more and 
more susceptible to other chronic conditions (diabetes and high blood pressure). 
In the real world, those chronic conditions might in turn lead to an extreme 
response such as a heart attack, but this statementdoes not exactly illustrate 
how a series of minor events can ultimately provokean extreme response to 
those same minor events. 
(B) CORRECT. A series of minor earthquakes (minor events) weaken the 
existing infrastructure. The weakened infrastructure then allows a minor 
earthquake to do greater damage (an extreme response) than would a single 
major earthquake. 
(C) This statement simply makes a judgment (those with peanut allergies should 
avoid peanuts); it does not illustrate how a seriesof minor events can provoke an 
extreme response. 
(D) A person can recover from a problem (failing a test). This does not illustrate 
how a series of minor events can provoke an extremeresponse. 
(E) A person engaging in an activity regularly (speeding) is more likely to be 
noticed for that activity than is a person who engages in it only occasionally. This 
does not illustrate how a series of minor events can provoke an extreme 
response.

3. The argument itself provides one example of the Doppler effect: a siren 
decreases in perceived pitch as it approaches, passes and then moves away 
from an observer. The answer choice that most closely describes a similar 
scenario is a correct illustration of the Doppler effect. 
(A) CORRECT. The passengers on the westbound train see the eastbound train 
approaching, passing, then traveling away from them. The sound of the horn, 
therefore, will decrease in pitch for the westboundpassengers. 
(B) The passengers on the westbound train see the eastbound train approaching, 
passing, then traveling away from them. The sound of the horn, therefore, will 
decrease in pitch for the westbound passengers. This choice, however, says that 
the sound will increase in pitch. 
(C) Relative to the passengers on the eastbound train, the eastbound train and 
its horn are in fact standing still! The Doppler effect only describes an “perceived 
change in pitch that occurs when the source of a sound is in motion relative to 
the observer,” a situation that is not illustrated by this choice. 
(D) Relative to the passengers on the eastbound train, the eastbound train and 
its horn are in fact standing still! The Doppler effect only describes an “perceived 
change in pitch that occurs when the source of a sound is in motion relative to 
the observer,” a situation that is not illustrated by this choice. 
(E) Relative to the passengers on the eastbound train, the eastbound train and 
its horn are in fact standing still! The Doppler effect only describes an “perceived 
change in pitch that occurs when the source of a sound is in motion relative to 
the observer,” so while it is true that the eastbound passengers would hear their 
train’s horn at its true pitch, this situation doesnot illustrate the Doppler effect.

4. Jim initially presents two premises: 1) it costs more to make a penny and a nickel 
than their face value; and 2) there is little that can be bought for a penny or a 
nickel. He goes on to opine that the coins no longer provide any necessary 
function to the economy, then concludes with a proposal to remove the coins 
from circulation and declare the basic unit of American currency to be 10 cents. 
Mary responds by implying that such a policy would be a "non-starter" based on 
her assumptions of the practical effects of trying to do so. 
(A) Mary’s assertion that all prices would round upto the nearest dime is not 
presented anywhere in the passage as a statement offact; it is simply an 
assumption made by Mary. 
(B) By asserting that Congress would not approve such a proposal as part of her 
response to Jim, Mary implies that such approval isnecessary. 
(C) Mary provides an argument that such a proposal would have little practical 
chance of being implemented because of its unpopularity. The unpopularity of a 
public proposal is not necessarily correlated with whether the proposal is 
“justified” or not. 
(D) There is nothing in the passage that describes how Congress would treat 
unpopular proposals. Mary’s assertion that Congresswould “never” approve 
such an unpopular proposal is an assumption made onher part. 
(E) CORRECT.Mary’s response is based on her assumption that Congress 
would not approve Jim’s proposal because she assumes that it would be 
extremely unpopular. She does not attack or even mention any of Jim’s premises 
underlying his proposal.

5. The owner of the coffee store makes three statements citing evidence supporting 
his belief that things are not going well at his store: 1) the store has become a 
hangout for teenagers; 2) many of his adult customers do not appear 
comfortable; and 3) some of them have told him theywill no longer frequent the 
store. He then states that his goal is to maximize his revenue and directs his 
store manager to discourage the teenagers from frequenting his store and to 
cultivate a more adult clientele. We can reasonablyinfer that the owner believes 
that his directive will help him achieve his goal of maximum revenue. 
In response, the store manager makes no attempt to refute the manager’s three 
statements, but instead offers some new evidence which implies that following 
the owner’s directive may work against the owner’s goal of maximum revenue, 
further implying that the status quo may be indeed be compatible with that goal. 
(A) The store manager makes no attempt to question the veracity of the 
statements of the owner. When the manager asks “Areyou sure?” he is 
questioning the owner’s directive (or its effectiveness), not the veracity of the 
owner’s evidence. 
(B) The implementation of the owner’s directive is not mentioned by the manager 
and is not relevant. 
(C) CORRECT.By asserting that the average teenager spends justas much 
money as the average adult and that there are more new customers than former 
customers, the manager is presenting new evidence that implies that the current 
situation is actually helping the owner achieve hisgoal more than his directive 
would. 
(D) The manager only states that the average teenager spends as much as the 
average adult; hence, he makes a claim as to the relative revenue generated by 
the average member of each group. He does not make any claim as to the 
relative profitabilityof the average member of each group. 
(E) The new evidence that the manager presents neither contradicts nor refutes 
any of the evidence that the owner had previous presented.

6. We begin by analyzing the structure of the problem: Premise:Garbage is 
usually collected here on Wednesdays, and the garbage collectors in this city 
are extremely reliable. Premise:Monday was a public holiday. Premise:
After a public holiday that falls on a Monday, garbage throughout the city is 
supposed to be collected one day later than usual. Conclusion:Garbage in 
this neighborhood probably will not be collected until Thursday this week. The 
argument is soundand the conclusion seems reasonable. The language in 
the conclusion is not absolute (“probably”), and this is justified since the 
language used in the argument—“usually” and “supposed to be”—is also 
probabilistic. Knowing that the argument is valid, the question you must ask 
yourself is, “How would I describe the structure ofthis argument?” Answer 
choice (A): This answer forces you to make an assessment of the premises 
(the “evidence”) as they relate to the conclusion. Are the premises irrelevant 
to the conclusion? Clearly not. Therefore, this answer is incorrect. Answer 
choice (B): This is a half-right, half-wrong answer. The argument does 
establish “that one thing is likely to occur.” But,is this established by ruling 
out all of the alternative possibilities? No, to dothat would mean presenting 
arguments against the garbage being collected on Friday, Saturday, Sunday, 
etc. Since this section of the answer choice does not occur, this answer is 
incorrect. Also, because the argument does not ruleout all the alternatives, 
the conclusion is not established “indirectly.” Answer choice (C): This is the 
correct answer. Consider each piece of the argument: “providing 
information”—a variety of information about the garbage situation is provided. 
“application of a general rule”—the general rule isthat “After a public holiday 
that falls on a Monday, garbage throughout the cityis supposed to be 
collected one day later than usual.” “to a specificcase”—the specific case is 
the pickup of garbage this week in this neighborhood. Given that all elements 
occurred and the answer presents an accurate description of the way the 
author made his or her argument, this answer is correct. Now, take a moment 
and compare this answer to the prephrase you made after reading the 
stimulus. How similar are the two? Given that you may not be familiar with 
the language used by the test makers, the two may not be very similar. As 
your preparation continues, you will become more comfortable with the 
language and your Method of Reasoning pre-phrasing will improve. For 
example, note the use in this answer of “general rule” to describe the last 
sentence of the stimulus. The test makers could also have used a phrase like 
“basic principle” to achieve the same result. Your job is to match their 
language to what occurred in the stimulus. Answer choice (D): This answer is 
an overgeneralization—a situation where one instance is used to make a 
broad based conclusion. This is a Reverse Answer since the stimulus 
actually uses a general principle and applies it toone instance. In addition, 
the language in the answer is far too strong in saying “all actions of a certain 
kind” when the language in the stimulus was probabilistic. Answer choice (E): 
This is an Exaggerated Answer. The conclusion states that “Garbage in this 
neighborhood probably will not be collected until Thursday this week” and the 
use of “probably” is a clear and obvious indicationthat the author does not 
think the Thursday garbage pickup is inevitable.

7. This is one of the greatest Method of Reasoning questions of all time. First 
take a close look at the statements made by Jane and Mark. In the majority 
of GMAT questions with two speakers—one identifiably male and the other 
identifiably female—the male makes a mistake or an error of reasoning and 
the female uses sound reasoning. This does not occur in every problem, but 
it occurs enough to be more than random. Why? The thinking goes that in 
order for GMAC to protect themselves against accusations that they are 
biased against women, they create problems where the male is clearly the 
one using faulty reasoning. Jane’s position: Jane concludes that Professor 
Harper’s ideas are valueless because there is no way to evaluate a guitar 
sound and determine what constitutes a better-sounding guitar. Mark’s 
position: Mark also agrees that Professor Harper’s ideas are valueless, but 
Mark’s reasoning is that if Harper’s ideas really worked, then they would have 
been adopted by now. In making this analysis, Mark reveals that he believes 
there is a way to determine that one guitar sounds better than another. Like 
all GMAT questions, you must lock down the exact nature of the premises 
and conclusions! Mark’s initial comment of “What’s more” leads most people 
to believe he is in complete agreement with Jane. Yes, he agrees with her 
conclusion, but his reason for doing so is completely contrary to Jane’s 
reason. Mark actually misinterprets Jane’s claim, and this is why he says 
“What’s more,” as if he is adding an additional piece of information that 
supports her position. He is not; the premise that he uses contradicts Jane’s 
premises. If you simply accept “What’s more” to mean that he is in complete 
agreement with Jane, you will most certainly miss the question, and have no 
idea you have done so. The problem becomes even more challenging 
because the answer choices are brilliantly constructed: Answer choice (A): 
Mark does not address a weakness in Jane’s argumentor show how one 
could be overcome. Do not mistake the use of “What’s more” to automatically 
mean that he is adding something helpful to the situation. Answer choice (B): 
This is an answer chosen by many people, and it hasShell game aspects. 
Mark’s argument does not have a premise in common with Jane’s argument; 
rather, Mark’s argument has the conclusion in common with Jane’s 
argument. Before you select this answer, use the Fact Test and ask yourself, 
“Which premise do the two arguments have in common?” You won’t be able 
to find one, and that would instantly disprove the answer. Answer choice (C): 
This is a very clever Reverse Answer choice. The answer states: “Mark and 
Jane use similar techniques to argue for different conclusions.” In fact, the 
following happens in the stimulus: “Mark and Jane use different techniques to 
argue for similar conclusions.” If you had any doubt that the makers of the 
GMAT put the same amount of work into the wrong answers as the correct 
answers, this answer choice should be convince you that they do. Answer 
choice (D): An argument is the sum of the premises and conclusion. Although 
Mark restates Jane’s conclusion, he does not restate her premises. 
Therefore, he does not restate her argument and this answer is incorrect. 
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer. As discussed in the argument 
analysis, Jane believes that there is no way to evaluate the merit of a guitar’s 
sounds. On the opposite side, Mark’s response indicates he believes that 
there is a way to evaluate the merit of a guitar’s sound (“because of the 
improvement it makes in tonal quality”) and thus the two have conflicting 
positions. This is another great example of a separator question: one that 
scorers in a certain range will get and scorers in a lower range will not get. 
This is also a dangerous question because many people think they have 
chosen the correct answer when in fact they have missed it. The lesson here 
is that you must be an active, prepared reader. Do not allow yourself to be 
lured by Mark’s comment of “What’s more” into believing that he 
automatically is in agreement with Jane. The test makers use that phrase to 
see if you will read closely enough to discern his real argument or if you will 
simply gloss over his comments on the basis of how they are introduced. The 
GMAT always makes you pay if you gloss over any section of a stimulus.

8. The arguments of Jorge and Ruth can be analyzed asfollows: Jorge’s 
Argument: Premise: Rock music of the 1960s was created by andfor people 
who were then in their teens and early twenties. Premise:You were just an 
infant then  . Conclusion:You won’t be able to write well about 
the rock music of the 1960s. Ruth’s Argument: Premise: There are living 
writers who write well about ancient Roman culture,even though those 
writers are obviously not a part of ancient Roman culture. Premise:Why 
should my youth alone prevent me from writing well about the music of a 
period as recent as the 1960s? Conclusion:Your reasoning is absurd. Note 
that the question stem asks you to identify how Ruth responded. When two-
speaker stimuli are combined with Method of Reasoning questions, you are 
typically asked to identify the reasoning of only one of the speakers (often the 
second speaker). However, you must still understandthe argument of the 
other speaker as the answer choices often refer to it. Now let’s use the 
answer choices to discuss the structure of the argument. Answer choice (A): 
Ruth does not challenge Jorge’s claim about her age. To the contrary, she 
seemingly admits he is correct when she says “Why should my youth 
alone...” Answer choice (B): Although Ruth uses an example that cites 
culture, she does not clarify a definition of popular culture, and certainly not 
one left implicit in Jorge’s argument. Answer choice (C): This is a Half Right, 
Half Wrong answer. The first part of the answer choice—“using the example 
of classical culture”—does occur in Ruth’s response, but she does not use 
that example “in order to legitimize contemporary culture as an object worthy 
of serious consideration.” Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer. An 
analogy is a comparison between two items. In argumentation, analogies are 
often used to clarify the relationship between the items or reveal a 
fundamental truth about one of the items, as in “Tobetter understand the 
operating system of your computer, think of it as the brain of your system.” 
The use of “brain” in the preceding sentence is theanalogy. Analogies can be 
used to challenge a position or support a position,but their strength often 
rests on the relevant similarities between the two items or scenarios. In the 
next chapter we will discuss False Analogies, wherean author uses an 
analogy that is dissimilar enough to be non-applicable. As referenced in this 
answer choice, Ruth analogizes writing about Roman culture to writing about 
the 1960s to show that it is not unreasonable that someone who was an 
infant can write about that time period. Jorge’s assumption is that if a person 
was not a teen or older during the 1960s, then theycannot write well about 
the music of that period. Since all elements described in the answer choice 
occur and the answer describes the method used by Ruth, this is the correct 
answer. Answer choice (E): Ruth does not attack Jorge’s qualification to 
make his argument, just his pronouncement that she will not be able to write 
well about the rock music of the 1960s.

9. The correct answer choice is (D). The arguments ofAnne and Sue can be 
analyzed as follows: Anne’s Argument: Premise: Halley’s Comet, now in a 
part of its orbit relatively far from the Sun, recently flared brightly enough to 
be seen by telescope. Premise:No comet has ever been observed to flare 
so far from the Sun before. Conclusion:Such a flare must be highly 
unusual. Sue’s Argument:Premise: Usually no one bothers to try to observe 
comets when they are so far from the Sun. Premise:This flare was observed 
only because an observatory was tracking Halley’s Comet very carefully. 
Conclusion:  Nonsense. As is often the case with two-speaker stimuli, the speakers disagree. In this case, Anne uses causal 
reasoning to indicate that the cause of the sighting is unusual activity with 
Halley’s comet: FU = the flare is highly unusual, NCO = no comet has ever 
been observed to flare so far from the sun, FUNCO. Sue counters by citing 
an alternate cause: no one has been looking for such a flare. NO = no one 
bothers to try to observe comets when they are so far from the Sun, NCO = 
no comet has ever been observed to flare so far from the sun, NONCO. 
The problem now becomes an exercise in figuring outhow the test makers 
will describe the alternative cause cited by Sue. Answer choice (A): This 
answer quickly fails the Fact Test. Sue does not comment on use of the term 
“observed” (other than to explain why the flare wasobserved). Answer choice 
(B): Although Sue cites an explanation that is inconsistent with Anne’s claim, 
she does not point out an inconsistency between twoof Anne’s claims. 
Answer choice (C): Remember, evidence is the same as premises. Does Sue 
contradict Anne’s premises? No, she only contradicts her conclusion. Do not 
be drawn in by the word “nonsense.” That word is used to attack the 
conclusion, not the premises of the argument. Answer choice (D): This is the 
correct answer. In this answer, the alternate causeis described as an 
“alternative explanation.” In most cases, a causal counterargument can be 
described as offering an alternative explanation. Answer choice (E): This is a 
Reverse Answer. The answer appears as follows: “undermining some of 
Anne’s evidence while agreeing with her conclusion”If the answer choice 
was reversed in the following manner, it would be correct: “undermining her 
  conclusion while agreeing with some of Anne’s evidence ” The 
evidence she agrees with is the first sentence of Anne’s argument (the 
premise in the second sentence is not directly addressed).

10. The correct answer choice is (D). The heart of Ingrid’s argument is that 
durability is measured by how many times a song is recorded, and using this 
standard, rock music songs are not as durable as songs from the 1940s. 
Jerome admits that rock music songs are not typically recorded multiple 
times, but he then introduces a new way of judging durability—one based on 
the continuing popularity of the original recording. Answer choice (A): Jerome 
does not misinterpret the claim. He starts off by saying, “True, rock songs are 
usually recorded only once,” and is a perfect characterization of part of 
Ingrid’s statement. Answer choice (B): This is a good example of an answer 
that might be kept as an initial Contender. However, as you further consider 
the answer, you must identify the “contradiction” m entioned in the answer 
choice. Does Jerome show that Ingrid’s claim must lead to a contradiction? 
No. Note that there is a difference between a speaker contradicting an 
argument (as Jerome does here) and a person making a statement that leads 
to an internal contradiction (known as a self-contradiction.) An example of a 
self-contradiction would be: “Everyone should join our country club. After all, 
it’s an exclusive group that links many of the influential members of the 
community.” The self-contradiction occurs when the speaker says “Everyone 
should join” and then follows that by saying that it is “an exclusive group.” 
Exclusive, by definition, means that some people are excluded. Answer 
choice (C): As discussed in answer choice (A), Jerome accepts the evidence 
presented by Ingrid. Because he does not undermine the truth of the 
evidence used by Ingrid, this answer is incorrect. Again, evidence is another 
way to say “premise.” We know that Jerome disagreeswith Ingrid’s 
conclusion, but that does not mean that he disagrees with her premise. 
Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer. Jerome’s standard for judging 
durability is the popularity of the original. This contrasts with Ingrid’s 
standard, which is the re-recording of the song. The point at issue is the 
definition of durability. Answer choice (E): Again,use the Fact Test on this 
answer. Where does Jerome claim that Ingrid’s knowledge is incomplete? As 
we discussed previously, he has admitted that her premise is true.

souvik101990 · Answer

Pretty disputable question Here is a detailed analysis. https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/the ... t3422.html

Marcab · Answer

Hii..
Consider a situation: Two trains pass each other going opposite directions on parallel east-west tracks. If the eastbound train, which , as the name suggests, moves towards the east, then the passengers sitting in the westbound train would be approaching that train. If the eastbound train blows a horn, then the passengers of the westbound train will hear a sound that MUST INCREASE in pitch.
Even if I were not given the choices, then also I would have chosen the right answer but the answer choices here amaze me.

Marcab · Answer

Some were really good. Somehow I can only take 8 at the moment, but will definitely try the rest. My takes are:
1A 2B 3E 4E 5C 6C 7E 8D. How'd you rate the level of these questions?

Carcass · Answer

I made some of them. This questions from this source are really good. On average the level is really tough, see for instance the 5 question (at least for me).

later I'll post my response

archilles · Answer

really good questions

My Answers :
1- E , 2 - B , 3 - A, 4 - E , 5- D , 6- E , 7- D , 8-D , 9- C ,10-C

OA please?

bugzor · Answer

1D 2B 3B 4E 5D 6C 7E 8D 9D 10C

for now I've used Marcab as a benchmark since he's very smart, 5/8

LGOdream · Answer

1A 2B 3E 4E 5C 6C 7E 8D 9D 10D.

If found all of them easy, and I am not good at CR. Either I'm totally lost or these questions are definitely not 700-800.

PrashantPonde · Answer

Kudos! good collection of CR questions. Some of them were really tricky.

PrashantPonde · Answer

Good explanation for problem 7: jane-professor-harper-s-ideas-for-modifying-the-design-of-89525.html#p680297

PrashantPonde · Answer

Those were excellent explanations. What is the source of the OEs? One of the explanation says " In the next chapter we will discuss False Analogies, where an author uses an analogy that is dissimilar enough to be non-applicable". I'm curious to know which book it is.

souvik101990 · Answer

Questions were taken from MGMAT LSAT POWERScore etc!
So there is no book!
Sorry!

Marcab · Answer

The answer for the question 3 is not correct. 
It can't be A at any cost. I can bet any money on this.

PrashantPonde · Answer

Why do you think A is wrong. It looks OK to me.

Marcab · Answer

It has to be disputable and the reply by Stacy that this question has been removed from the pool gave me relief.

souvik101990 · Answer

Yeah if a question has even a little trace of dispute to it, I would suggest to leave it alone and move on.

mohnish104 · Answer

Pretty awsm list of questions. I scored 6/10. Correct ans include 1,2,7,8,9,10.

jeffjose · Answer

Neat set of questions. Thanks for sharing, and KUDOS!

LucasGoestoMBA · Answer

excellent questions! thanks for sharing

CR Misc/Minor Question Types (700-800)

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

CR Misc/Minor Question Types (700-800)

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards