Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 02 Sep 2014, 11:09

Close

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
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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
3 KUDOS received
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 930
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 259 [3] , given: 543

Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 16 Jul 2013, 01:22
3
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

60% (02:31) correct 40% (01:32) wrong based on 369 sessions
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and promotions depend significantly on the amount of their published work. People responsible for making hiring and promotion decisions in the biomedical research field, however, are influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications.

The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?

a. Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field.
b. Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published.
c. The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.
d. People responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers can reasonably be expected to make a fair assessment of the overall impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field.
e. Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Would C be a contender if the word "sometimes" isn't there?
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Click +1 Kudos if my post helped...

Amazing Free video explanation for all Quant questions from OG 13 and much more http://www.gmatquantum.com/og13th/

GMAT Prep software What if scenarios gmat-prep-software-analysis-and-what-if-scenarios-146146.html

1 KUDOS received
VP
VP
User avatar
Status: Far, far away!
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Posts: 1125
Location: Italy
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.8
Followers: 112

Kudos [?]: 1138 [1] , given: 219

GMAT ToolKit User GMAT Tests User
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 16 Jul 2013, 01:37
1
This post received
KUDOS
fozzzy wrote:
Would C be a contender if the word "sometimes" isn't there?


The argument says something like:
it's the quality/the impact not the quantity that matters to get promotions

The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?

e. Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings (HENCE increasing the QUANTITY) so that they are published in several journals instead of one. This is against what the argument says.


To answer your question:
c. The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.
IMO no. C talks about the "potential scientific importance", but the argument talks about the "impact" (something not "potential", something that already happened, if it's clear what I mean...). C remains out of scope.
_________________

It is beyond a doubt that all our knowledge that begins with experience.

Kant , Critique of Pure Reason

Tips and tricks: Inequalities , Mixture | Review: MGMAT workshop
Strategy: SmartGMAT v1.0 | Questions: Verbal challenge SC I-II- CR New SC set out !! , My Quant

Rules for Posting in the Verbal Forum - Rules for Posting in the Quant Forum[/size][/color][/b]

Expert Post
4 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1783
Followers: 1244

Kudos [?]: 3440 [4] , given: 183

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 16 Jul 2013, 02:21
4
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
fozzzy wrote:
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and promotions depend significantly on the amount of their published work. People responsible for making hiring and promotion decisions in the biomedical research field, however, are influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications.

The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?

a. Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field.
b. Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published.
c. The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.
d. People responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers can reasonably be expected to make a fair assessment of the overall impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field.
e. Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
Would C be a contender if the word "sometimes" isn't there?


Hi,

Understanding question stem is the key in this question. It says that we need to find an option statement which is most strongly opposed by the passage. So, this means that the passage should support the opposite (or negation ) of the correct choice. S, while evaluating option statements, what we need to do is negate the option statement and then, see if the negated option statement is supported by the passage or not. If the negate statement is supported by the passage, then that option is the correct choice.

Now, with this understanding in mind, whether I keep "sometimes" or not in the option statement C is not going to impact the answer because the negation of both the statement is same:

The negation of "The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers." is

The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is never taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.

The negation of "The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers." is

The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is not sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.

So, keeping or removing "Sometimes" will not help.

Now, why option C is incorrect? Let's look at the negated statement:

The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is never taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.

Does the passage support this? The answer is No. The passage does not talk about unpublished work and it does not say that only published work is considered. So, this choice is incorrect.

Let's now negate option E:

Biomedical researchers cannot substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one

Is this supported by the passage? The answer is Yes. The passage clearly says that quality is important, not the quantity. So, a person cannot increase his chance by splitting his work into many published papers because the content and therefore, the quality remains same.

Does this help?

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________



Free Webinar: Sep 6, 2014 - Ace GMAT Sentence Correction: Register for this Free Webinar to learn the importance of meaning, achieve 90% accuracy and score V40+. Click here to register.

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Posts: 45
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 15

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 16 Jul 2013, 12:39
whats wrong with B here ?
Argument talks about impact of published scientific articles, so B is also against what argument said.
3 KUDOS received
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1029
Location: United States
Followers: 117

Kudos [?]: 1200 [3] , given: 119

Premium Member
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 16 Jul 2013, 13:40
3
This post received
KUDOS
smartmanav wrote:
whats wrong with B here ?
Argument talks about impact of published scientific articles, so B is also against what argument said.


Hi smartmanav

I'm glad to help.

ANALYZE THE QUESTION

First of all, you need to understand what the question stem says correctly. This is the KEY.
"The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?" <== the conclusion that is being weaken is NOT in the argument. You need to find which CONCLUSION is weaken the most by THE INFORMATION in the argument.

NOTE: This question stem is the reverse version of "normal" weaken questions which say: which of the information following, if accurate, argues most strongly against the argument conclusion? The normal weaken questions will ask you to find information that weakens the conclusion in the stimulus.But this question is not the same pattern. The information is already in the stimulus, your task is to find a conclusion that the information tries to weaken.

Back to the question,
The “information above” indicates that: to increase chances of promotion, publications quality is more important than quantity ==> Thus, this information "should" weaken the conclusion which indicates that quantity can help increase the chances of promotion

What B says.
"Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published."

Does “the information above” weaken the conclusion in B? To weaken the conclusion which maintains that "contribution of research are considered to be significant only if the work is published", the stimulus “should” says something like “contribution of research are considered to be significant even when the work has not published yet”. But you don't see any information like that in the stimulus. So, B cannot be the conclusion that is weaken by the stimulus.

Hope it helps.
_________________

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMV Chief of Design.

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 23 Jan 2013
Posts: 113
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 18

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 18 Jul 2013, 02:36
reverse Must be true! Looks original
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 23 Jun 2013
Posts: 45
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 17 Nov 2013, 05:43
what is wrong with option A
"Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field"

The last line in the stimulus says quality & not quantity is important. but what if every-one has the required quality then the differentiator will be no. of good quality publications.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 30
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 21

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 10 Jul 2014, 05:56
Nilabh_s wrote:
what is wrong with option A
"Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field"

The last line in the stimulus says quality & not quantity is important. but what if every-one has the required quality then the differentiator will be no. of good quality publications.



Well, you got the first part right: quality > quantity.

Now, focus on how this argument can be destroyed. And, keep it simple. Anything that focuses on the works themselves, and aids researchers in landing jobs outside of the quality of their publications --- will hurt the author's argument.

To your point: what if everyone has the same quality? That's not what Choice A is really saying :)

Choice A focuses on Researchers (not all) who are just beginning their careers, having already published articles of great significance. Tho a little tempting because of the key words it uses, Choice A is not in the ballpark of the conclusion.

The conclusion focuses on the publications themselves, and the quality (significance) of the publicized works --- and, how this all helps researchers land jobs.

Choice C tells us how researchers can get jobs outside of the quality of their works.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2012
Posts: 101
Schools: IIMA
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 59

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink] New post 26 Jul 2014, 04:19
If you look at below bold part , answer is clearly E

biomedical research field, however, are influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications.

and look now at option E :)

Hope that helps :)
_________________

If you are not over prepared then you are under prepared !!!

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h   [#permalink] 26 Jul 2014, 04:19
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Biomedical researchers gmatprep09 2 07 Jul 2009, 07:41
6 Until quite recently, American economists have assumed that ashish8221573 30 19 Oct 2008, 09:45
Until quite recently, American economists have assumed that spriya 8 10 Sep 2008, 18:32
Until quite recently, American economists have assumed that empty_spaces 5 29 Jul 2007, 15:31
8 Until quite recently, American economists have assumed that MA 29 31 Jul 2006, 19:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.