In an experiment, each volunteer was allowed to choose between an easy

What if people who assign to themself easy task really think that this is fair? And what if another group really think that assigning easy task is unfair? In this case we can say that experiment was wrong because we pick wrong people in groups (selective bias). Therefore conclusion is wrong: people don't apply weaker moral standards to themselves.

But if people from first group were placed in second group and said that assigning easy task to themself is wrong, than conclusion is correct: people change moral standard according to situation.


(A) At least some volunteers who said they had acted fairly in choosing the easy task would have said that it was unfair for someone else to do so.
This answer gives us example in which people from first group change their mind according to situation.

(B) The most moral choice for the volunteers would have been to have the computer assign the two tasks randomly.
we don't need to decide what is most moral choice.

(C) There were at least some volunteers who were assigned to do the hard task and felt that the assignment was unfair.
We need to know about people who made assignment and not about who was assigned.

(D) On average, the volunteers to whom the scenario was described were more accurate in their moral judgments than the other volunteers were.
This variant is tricky because it is easy weakener and we tend to pick it in case when we forget about question.
This is weakener because if first group was inaccurate then they didn't lye but just was inaccurate. So we can infer that first group do not apply weaker moral standards to themselves.

(E) At least some volunteers given the choice between assigning the tasks themselves and having the computer assign them felt that they had made the only fair choice available to them.
The main question how they named their actions later, not what they think before making of choice

In an experiment, each volunteer was allowed to choose between an easy task and a hard task and was told that another volunteer would do the other task. Each volunteer could also choose to have a computer assign the two tasks randomly. Most volunteers chose the easy task for themselves and under questioning later said they had acted fairly. But when the scenario was described to another group of volunteers, almost all said choosing the easy task would be unfair. This shows that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others.

Which of the following is an assumption required by this argument?

(A) At least some volunteers who said they had acted fairly in choosing the easy task would have said that it was unfair for someone else to do so.
(B) The most moral choice for the volunteers would have been to have the computer assign the two tasks randomly.
(C) There were at least some volunteers who were assigned to do the hard task and felt that the assignment was unfair.
(D) On average, the volunteers to whom the scenario was described were more accurate in their moral judgments than the other volunteers were.
(E) At least some volunteers given the choice between assigning the tasks themselves and having the computer assign them felt that they had made the only fair choice available to them.

The choice is between A and E:

E seems tricky so lets break it down
(At least) Some volunteers felt that they made the only fair choice available to them (given two choices: picking on their own and assigning or letting the computer assign)
Negate it:
None (of the volunteers) felt that they made the only fair choice available to them.
 None felt they made the fair choice between assigning and letting the computer assign the task
Does it tell anything about their moral?  whether they think they picked the easy task and gave the tough task to someone else? Not clearly.
So without negation:
At least say, 1-10 out of 100 volunteers feel that they made the only fair choice available to them  which is:
1. Choosing which to assign to whom  does it tell us whether they chose the easy one? Or the tough one? What is THEIR fair choice? Doesn’t tell anything about morality
2. Letting the computer choose  Weaker one who got? Tougher one who got? What do the volunteers feel about this? Does it portray their morality? No.

Option A:
Negate it:
None of the volunteers who said they had acted fairly in choosing the easy task would have said that it was unfair for someone else to do so  shows strong morality and no deviation. Means group 1 people when asked didnt reply as group 2 (weakens the conclusion)
Without negating it: Some, say 10 (it can be all 100 also) volunteers from group 1 (who participated in the experiment) switched their opinion when questioned on this and said, it would have been unfair to choose the easy task and give the hard task to someone else (but they themselves did it when they participated in the experiment)  Weaker moral standard for self and higher moral standard on others.
Closest to the right answer and hence OA - A

Passage analysis
In an experiment, each volunteer was allowed to choose between an easy task and a hard task

In an experiment each volunteer was given the option of choosing between an easy task and a difficult one.

and was told that another volunteer would do the other task.

The task that these volunteers did not choose would be done by another volunteer

Each volunteer could also choose to have a computer assign the two tasks randomly.

Another option was that each volunteer could also get a computer to assign the two tasks randomly to two volunteers

Most volunteers chose the easy task for themselves

Fact: It was observed that most (>50%, a clear majority) volunteers did not opt for the computer’s choice but chose to take up the easy task for themselves.

and under questioning later said they had acted fairly

Fact: When these volunteers were questioned whether they had acted fairly by taking up the easy task, they said they had been fair.

But when the scenario was described to another group of volunteers, almost all said choosing the easy task would be unfair.

Fact: When this case was put before another group of volunteers, almost all said that choosing the easy task had been unfair.

This shows that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others.
Conclusion: The author believes that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to the others based on the results of an experiment where Group 1, when given the choice picked the easy task and called this choice fair, and Group 2 called group 1’s action unfair.


pre-thinking
Falsification Question

In what scenario will most people not apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to the others?
Given that -> The volunteers could have got the computer to assign the tasks to them
But they chose the easier task for themselves and left the hard one for another volunteer.

When questioned, another group of volunteers called the previous group
unfair for having chosen the easier task for themselves.

Thought process

Let us look at the author’s point of view. Based on the outcome of an experiment the author makes a claim. In the experiment, most volunteers finally end up choosing the easy task for themselves. When another group of volunteers is asked to comment on this, they call the first group unfair. So, this second group that did not have to choose any tasks was judging the other group. Now because of all this, the author concludes that people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others. Or in other words, when it comes to judging themselves, people go easy as compared to when judging others.

Falsification condition#1

What if the group of volunteers calling the other group that had chosen easy tasks unfair, chosen difficult tasks themselves when asked to do so?

In that case, with the belief that they had acted fairly, they would have been right in calling the others unfair. In that case they would have been applying the same moral standards to others that they were applying to themselves. They would be calling themselves fair and the others unfair. And our conclusion would break down.

Assumption#1

The group of volunteers calling the other group that had chosen easy tasks unfair, would have themselves chosen easy tasks and believed themselves to have been fair.

Falsification Condition#2

What if the group of volunteers who had chosen easy tasks and called it fair, would have also called it fair if someone else had done the same?

In that case, with the belief that they had acted fairly, they would have said the others were being fair too when they chose easy tasks. they would have been applying the same moral standards to others that they were applying to themselves. And our conclusion would break down.

Assumption#2

The group that had chosen the easy task and believed they had been fair, would have called the others who had done the same, unfair.

Answer Choice Analysis

Option A

This option means that some volunteers believed that when they had chosen the easy task themselves, they had been fair. But they called it unfair if someone else did so.

This is in line with our pre-thinking assumption#2 which says that some of the ones who had chosen the easy task themselves, were calling the others who had done the same, unfair. Had they chosen the hard task, they would have been right in judging the others unfairly. They would then be applying the same standards to others that they were to themselves. In that case, our conclusion would break down.

Hence, this is the correct answer.

Option B

This option means the best moral choice for volunteers would have been not to choose the tasks themselves but to let the computer do so randomly.

Does this have to be true for my conclusion to be true? Let us say the volunteers do not choose the tasks themselves. They let the computer do so. In that case, the morality factor does not come into play at all. Does that prove or disprove the claim? No. The computer assigning the task is actually irrelevant to a discussion because we are talking about a scenario where one assigns moral standards when making the choice oneself.
Hence, this is not the answer.

Option C

This option means there was at least one volunteer who was assigned to do the hard task and felt that this was unfair to him.

Once again, we are looking at an irrelevant scenario. If one is assigned the hard task, either because somebody else took the easy one or because the computer did so, then the claim does not apply to them at all. They are not the ones who are being considered in the argument. We are only concerned with the ones who made the easy task choice themselves. And called the others who did the same unfair.
Hence, this is not the correct answer.

Option D

This option talks about the accuracy of moral judgments made by the group of volunteers (the second group of volunteers) to whom the scenario was described. It says they were more accurate in their judgment than the others.

Does this break my conclusion if it is not true? No. Whether they were more accurate or less accurate in the judgment does not change the claim that they were being judgmental – they were applying one judgment to themselves and another to the others. The level of accuracy hardly matters.
Hence, this is not the correct option.

Option E

The option means that at least one volunteer, who was asked to choose between assigning the task himself and getting the task assigned by the computer, felt that he had made the only fair choice that was available to him.
The conclusion does not require us to consider about the volunteers themselves feeling that they had only one fair choice available to them by choosing the task themselves. It is what the others think about the choice that is being considered here.
Hence, this is not the correct option.

I got the right answer (A) by eliminating the other ones, but this point below made me lose some seconds thiking...

"But when the scenario was described to another group of volunteers, almost all said choosing the easy task would be unfair. This shows that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others."

"(A) At least some volunteers who said they had acted fairly in choosing the easy task would have said that it was unfair for someone else to do so."

This "at least some" makes it harder to sustain the argument in the passage, if they used "most" it would be more clear.

Premise) : In an experiment, each volunteer was allowed to choose between an easy task and a hard task and was told that another volunteer would do the other task
Premise: Each volunteer could also choose to have a computer assign the two tasks randomly.
Premise: Most volunteers chose the easy task for themselves and under questioning later said they had acted fairly.
Premise: But when the scenario was described to another group of volunteers, almost all said choosing the easy task would be unfair

Conclusion: This shows that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others.
Understanding the conclusion is little tough here.
According to the conclusion, people chose easier task for themselves defining it as fair rather than letting others do it.

If we negate choice A, we get:
At least some volunteers who said they had acted fairly in choosing the easy task would NOT have said that it was unfair for someone else to do so.
If that is so then there are some volunteers who do not mind applying the weaker moral standards to others. Thus the conclusion falls apart. This choice damages the conclusion.

If we negate choice E:
At least some volunteers given the choice between assigning the tasks themselves and having the computer assign them did not feel that they had made the only fair choice available to them.
This choice could be a competitor but the point that ‘only fair choice’ out of other fair choices does not really effects the conclusion.

Dear Expert,

I have a query regarding the choice A. The author assume that the first group will respond the same way as the second group, that is why the author reach a conclusion from and for the two groups. Since the word ''some'' is related with more than zero quantity, I have two escenarios:

1- "Some" people of the first group range from 1% to 50%, this escenario does not match with the author conclusion (''most people''), so this assumption is not true.
2- ''Some" people of the first group range from 51% to 100%, this escenario matches with the author conclusion (''most people''), so this assumption is true.

Then, when a choice is partially true the choice is not true, so choice A is not true.

Please let me know where my reasoning is wrong.

Regards,

Ah, we need to distinguish between "required" (ie, necessary) and sufficient...

If most of the volunteers apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others, then at least some of the volunteers MUST apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others. You are right that statement A, by itself, is not sufficient to justify the conclusion, but it is certainly required. Since we are looking for an assumption that is required by the argument, the correct choice is definitely A.

For more on sufficient vs necessary, see this thread: https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-sufficient ... 50740.html

Responding to a pm:

Premises:
Volunteer chose easy task for himself and allotted the harder to the other instead of random allotment. They said they had acted fairly.
A second group of volunteers declared their actions unfair.

Conclusion: This shows that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others.

We are looking for an assumption i.e. a missing necessary premise.

The conclusion says that people apply weaker moral standards to themselves but stricter to others.

(A) At least some volunteers who said they had acted fairly in choosing the easy task would have said that it was unfair for someone else to do so.
Correct. We know that the first set of people said they had acted fairly while the second set had said that they had acted unfairly. But we are concluding that people apply different moral standards to themselves vs others. So we are assuming that the first set would have called the decision unfair for others and that the second would have called the decision fair for themselves. We are assuming that these are not just two sets of very different people who have different moral standards. For example, if the two sets of people belonged to two different communities in which moral standards were different, then our conclusion would fail. We are assuming that if the first set volunteers were in the shoes of the second set, they would behave similarly as did the second set.

(B) The most moral choice for the volunteers would have been to have the computer assign the two tasks randomly.
We are not asked to judge what is moral what is not. We are only asked to compare the moral standards people assign to themselves vs to others.

(C) There were at least some volunteers who were assigned to do the hard task and felt that the assignment was unfair.
Whether anyone was actually assigned the hard task, we don't know. It doesn't matter.

(D) On average, the volunteers to whom the scenario was described were more accurate in their moral judgments than the other volunteers were.
Again, we are not asked to judge what is moral what is not. We are only asked to compare the moral standards people assign to themselves vs to others.

(E) At least some volunteers given the choice between assigning the tasks themselves and having the computer assign them felt that they had made the only fair choice available to them.
We don't know whether they believe it was the only fair choice. All we know is that they said it was fair. We don't need to assume that they believed it was the only fair choice.

Answer (A)

The argument is most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others.

In other words, in this case, most people who chose an easy task would say they acted fairly.

OA is A. This is a good question because according to choice A, at least some of the same volunteers would have said that it would have been unfair if others had chosen the easy task. Thus choice A makes the argument complete.

[/quote]

'at least some' can be negated in the following way...'all said they had acted fairly'...or 'no one said they acted fairly'

if all said they acted fairly...then this does not affect the argument on negation...

request you to kindly shed some light on this...

ENEM

It should be 'no one said they acted fairly'. Hope this has answered your 2nd question as well. in case of 'no one', argument is not standing true as few are not feeling well moraled.

In an experiment, each volunteer was allowed to choose between an easy task and a hard task and was told that another volunteer would do the other task. Each volunteer could also choose to have a computer assign the two tasks randomly. Most volunteers chose the easy task for themselves and under questioning later said they had acted fairly. But when the scenario was described to another group of volunteers, almost all said choosing the easy task would be unfair. This shows that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others.

Which of the following is an assumption required by this argument?

(A) At least some volunteers who said they had acted fairly in choosing the easy task would have said that it was unfair for someone else to do so.
Negate this. This does break the conclusion. Keep it.

(B) The most moral choice for the volunteers would have been to have the computer assign the two tasks randomly.
Most, Extreme word. Drop it.

(C) There were at least some volunteers who were assigned to do the hard task and felt that the assignment was unfair.
Negate this, does not affect our conclusion. Drop it.

(D) On average, the volunteers to whom the scenario was described were more accurate in their moral judgments than the other volunteers were.
Irrelevant. Drop it.

(E) At least some volunteers given the choice between assigning the tasks themselves and having the computer assign them felt that they had made the only fair choice available to them.
Repeats Premise. Drop it.

Answer: A

Official Answer:-

Argument Construction

Situation: In an experiment, most volunteers chose to do an easy task themselves and leave a hard task for someone else. They later said they had acted fairly, but almost all volunteers in another group to which the scenario was described said choosing the easy task would be unfair, indicating that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves.

Reasoning: What must be true in order for the facts presented to support the conclusion that most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others? One set of volunteers said they had acted fairly in taking the easy task, whereas different volunteers said that doing so would be unfair. In neither case did any of the volunteers actually judge their own behavior differently from how they judged anyone else’s. So the argument implicitly infers from the experimental results that most of the
volunteers would judge their own behavior differently from someone else’s if given the chance.

This inference assumes that the volunteers in the second group would have applied the same moral standards that those in the first group did if they had been in the first group’s position and vice versa.
A Correct. If none of the volunteers who said their own behavior was fair would have judged someone else’s similar behavior as unfair, then their relaxed moral judgment of themselves would not suggest that they applied weaker moral standards to themselves than to others.
B Even if this is so, the experimental results could still suggest that the volunteers would apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others.
C The argument would be equally strong even if volunteers who were assigned the hard task did not know that someone else had gotten an easier task—or even if no volunteers were actually assigned the hard task at all.
D Even if the moral standards applied by the volunteers who judged themselves were as accurate as those applied by the volunteers to whom the scenario was described, the former standards were still weaker.
E Even if all the volunteers in the first group had felt that all the choices available to them would have been fair for them to make personally, they might have applied stricter moral standards to someone else in the same position.
The correct answer is A.

See the pictorial diagram to crack the CR

A. At least some volunteers who said they had acted fairly in choosing the easy task would have said that it was unfair for someone else to do so.—MATCHES OUR FIGURE

B. The most moral choice for the volunteers would have been to have the computer assign the two tasks randomly.
( doesn’t affect our discussion)

(C) There were at least some volunteers who were assigned to do the hard task and felt that the assignment was unfair.
(it doesn’t affect our conclusion)

D) On average, the volunteers to whom the scenario was described were more accurate in their moral judgments than the other volunteers were.
(their accuracy doesn’t affect our conclusion; if they have choosen the same step as our subject to be our assumption)

(E) At least some volunteers given the choice between assigning the tasks themselves and having the computer assign them felt that they had made the only fair choice available to them.
( self choose or computer selection doesn’t affect our conclusion )

I just try my best to write down my thinking, however not sure whether its correct or not
for these choices, (A) and (C) are quite similar contenders, and the logic behind how we eliminate (C) is in these two points

(1) the keywords “easy task” and “hard task”, notice the premises in the argument, there’re only words for easy task rather than hard task, so clearly it is (A) be the correct choice

and

(2) the active and passive tone, notice the conclusion is focus on –people apply weaker standards to “themselves” than to others, so its voice is active rather passive, (A) says volunteers choose easy task for themselves, its spontaneous while (C) says volunteers BE ASSIGNED to do the hard task, in here they’re asked to do the assignment, so if (C) be true then it will violate the voice in conclusion and the conclusion won’t hold


(B) computer assign, this is just a supplement to our premises/argument as well as conclusion, not our main focus
(D) accurate judgement is out of scope, it won’t affect the moral-standard- comparing between two groups of volunteers
(E) here we’re focus on comparing the moral-standard of two groups of volunteers, not how they feel-fair or unfair-about the chosen assignment(assign the task themselves or by computer)


or using negation test to make the thinking more clearer

(A)“negate (A) :NONE” of volunteers who acted fairly in easy task would have said it is unfair for someone else to do so
--> “ALL” easy-task-assigned volunteers would let another group of volunteers to do the same task and won’t said its unfair
--> then the conclusion (two set of standards to different people in that easy-task-assigned volunteers would only say its fair to itself, while for another group they will deem it unfair) will break



(B) negate (B) :the “LEAST” moral choice for the volunteers would have been to have the computer assign the two tasks randomly
--> so “NO” computer assign to two tasks would be more moral, maybe if these two tasks are all processed by manpower rather than computer would be more moral, but whether or not we choose to use computer or manpower, it won’t affect our conclusion, which is aim at “comparing who will apply the weaker moral standards to their group or another group, or it can be that (B) doesn’t exist but our conclusion still hold true



(C) negate (C) :there were “NO” volunteers who were assigned the hard task and felt that assignment unfair
--> “ALL” volunteers were assigned the hard task and felt fair to the assignment ….(1)
so if (1) be true, will our conclusion break?
“NO” people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to others
= all apply “EQUAL” moral standard for themselves and others
well, the logic seems promising in that if all people assigned the hard task and all feel fair to this assignment, then it must be that all people adopt the same moral standards no matter for themselves or another, but as we already know that, when comparing for fair or unfair, our axis is placed at “easy task” or “hard task” though two kinds of task were indeed assigned to the volunteers



(D) negate (D) : one volunteer is “MORE INACCURATE” in their moral judgement than other volunteer, in truth, this will strengthen rather than break the conclusion, since if this one volunteer be “MORE INACCURATE” to themselves in moral judgement, he/she will be more likely to apply weaker moral standards to themselves



(E) negate (E) : “NONE” of the volunteers felt that they made the only fair choice(assign themselves or having the computer assign)
--> “MOST” volunteers felt unfair to the choice they choose
here the crux is same as (B), the way they choose how they do the task, whether by computer or another media, won’t affect the conclusion at all as the conclusion is for comparing the deviation to the moral standards of different groups of volunteers

NONE = 0 %
ALL= 100 %
SOME = 1 to 99 %


In Logic and Tautology --->
SOME = MANY = FEW = SEVERAL=MOST

Mathematically speaking there is no strict difference in SOME, MANY, FEW, SEVERAL, MOST as far as logical deduction are concerned. SOME says the value is more than 0 % and less than 100 %

Therefore ---> The 3 important quantitative attributes in logic are NONE (0%), ALL (100%) and SOME (1% to 99%)
Always remember that !!!

i see that quite a few posts, posts that are basically trying to explain why option C is incorrect, are missing a point here and there. Let me explain.

Firstly, the conclusion is not about only the "choosing" aspect. Yes the argument is basically talking about the behaviour of volunteers who were given a choice between an easy task and a hard task, how a few of the volunteers chose the easy task for themselves and on questioning claimed that they had acted fairly and the others basically did not have any choice - they just had to go with the hard task, and then this whole situation was described to another set of volunteers who said that choosing the easy task would be unfair. Now the conclusion is - "most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to the others".... the conclusion is *not* this - " when given a choice, most people apply weaker moral standards to themselves than to the others" ..... so the conclusion is about general behaviour of people in general, not about the general behaviour of specifically the people who were given the luxury of choosing the task. This is what the logical gap in the given argument is in my honest opinion. Therefore option C is not quite irrelevant.

Now let me explain precisely why option C is not an assumption.

Firstly the option as it is means that the people who were assigned the hard task were not ok with the fact the other volunteers were given the luxury of choosing the easy task. This is basically the same as what the volunteers to whom the whole experiments was described said.. right? Hence this option is, if anything, strengthening the argument. BUT is it necessary for the argument? Let is negate the whole option. On negation we get - "none of the volunteers who were assigned the hard task felt that the assignment was unfair", which means that they were ok with the other volunteers choosing an easy task, which means that they are, in a way, applying a higher moral standard to themselves, which is contrary to what the conclusion is saying. Thus this option is weakening the conclusion, BUT is not necessary for the conclusion to hold- what if these same people who were assigned the hard task were given the luxury of choosing the task, what will these people do then is now an open question, may be they will have the same perspective as the ones who were part of the experiment and were given an option of choosing the task.... therefore while the negation of option C does weaken the conclusion, it doesn't break the conclusion.

VeritasKarishma is my analysis ok? requesting a feedback..... best regards.