Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 19 Jan 2017, 10:24

### 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

# Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 29 Nov 2012
Posts: 898
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 1044 [5] , given: 543

Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2013, 01:22
5
KUDOS
15
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

62% (02:19) correct 38% (01:20) wrong based on 833 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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 http://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-prep-software-analysis-and-what-if-scenarios-146146.html

If you have any questions
New!
VP
Status: Far, far away!
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Posts: 1123
Location: Italy
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.8
Followers: 181

Kudos [?]: 1965 [3] , given: 219

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2013, 01:37
3
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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.

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]

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1996
Followers: 2081

Kudos [?]: 7149 [5] , given: 267

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2013, 02:21
5
KUDOS
Expert's post
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Intern
Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Posts: 41
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 15

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 15 Jun 2012
Posts: 1153
Location: United States
Followers: 259

Kudos [?]: 2867 [5] , given: 123

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2013, 13:40
5
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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

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 BMW Chief of Design.

Director
Joined: 23 Jan 2013
Posts: 579
Schools: Cambridge'16
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 40

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2013, 02:36
reverse Must be true! Looks original
Intern
Joined: 23 Jun 2013
Posts: 45
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 2

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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.
Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 63
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 60 [0], given: 57

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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
Joined: 05 Jun 2012
Posts: 130
Schools: IIMA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 66

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

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 !!!

Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 100
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 49

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2015, 08:51
Manager
Joined: 16 Jan 2015
Posts: 54
Location: United States
Schools: Kellogg '17, ISB '17
GMAT Date: 05-20-2015
GPA: 3.06
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 11 [1] , given: 44

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2015, 09:05
1
KUDOS
We have to attack the claim that - no. does not matter but quality matters

so , we must find something which says - no. does matters to justify the question

On checking the options , you can straight away eliminate all , but option E , which exactly mentions the same
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10533
Followers: 918

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2016, 18:03
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.
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their h   [#permalink] 09 Apr 2016, 18:03
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 Researchers have discovered that caffeine can be as 12 21 May 2010, 17:58
Biomedical researchers 2 07 Jul 2009, 07:41
56 Doctors in Britain have long suspected that patients who 38 16 Aug 2008, 15:09
1 People have long been fascinated by the paranormal. Over the 7 31 Jan 2008, 23:07
Tourists have long complained that hotel accommodations in 4 19 May 2007, 14:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by