Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 1912:30 PM EST
-01:30 PM EST
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
The editor of Metathesis, a new academic journal of literature, manages the peer-review of articles submitted for publication. The journal accepts articles focusing on any of three general subject areas: comparative literature, modernist literature, and postcolonial literature.
When an article is submitted, the editor has the article peer-reviewed by exactly three experts, none of whom authored or coauthored the article. The table (see the Reviewers/Authors tab) consists of all the authors or coauthors who have recently submitted articles and all the experts who currently peer-review or have recently peer-reviewed those articles. It also lists the general subject areas for each of the authors and reviewers.
Each author of each submitted article specializes in the general subject area of the article. Moreover, each recently submitted article was peer-reviewed by experts listed in the table.
When an article is submitted, the editor has the article peer-reviewed by exactly three experts, none of whom authored or coauthored the article. The table (see the Reviewers/Authors tab) consists of all the authors or coauthors who have recently submitted articles and all the experts who currently peer-review or have recently peer-reviewed those articles. It also lists the general subject areas for each of the authors and reviewers.
Each author of each submitted article specializes in the general subject area of the article. Moreover, each recently submitted article was peer-reviewed by experts listed in the table.
Nichols was a primary reviewer and Farkas the secondary reviewer.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
82% (03:26) correct
18%
(03:14)
wrong
based on 677
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Suppose that Borsky has recently authored an article that has been peer-reviewed by Metathesis. With this supposition, the information provided does NOT imply that which one of the following is FALSE?
| Poundstone was a primary reviewer and Kenyatta the secondary reviewer. | |
| Nichols was a primary reviewer and Kenyatta the secondary reviewer. | |
| Kenyatta was a primary reviewer and Nichols the secondary reviewer. | |
| Nichols was a primary reviewer and Farkas the secondary reviewer. | |
| Poundstone was a primary reviewer and Huang the secondary reviewer. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Nichols was a primary reviewer and Farkas the secondary reviewer.
Amaros was a primary reviewer of the article.: Consistent
Huang was the secondary reviewer of the article.: Consistent
Huang was the author of the article: Consistent
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
35% (02:13) correct
65%
(01:59)
wrong
based on 1001
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Suppose that all three reviewers for a certain recently submitted article were from the same university. For each of the following statements, select Consistent if the supposition, together with the information provided, does NOT imply that the statement is FALSE. Otherwise, select Not consistent.
| Consistent | Not Consistent | |
| Amaros was a primary reviewer of the article. | ||
| Huang was the secondary reviewer of the article. | ||
| Huang was the author of the article |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Amaros was a primary reviewer of the article.: Consistent
Huang was the secondary reviewer of the article.: Consistent
Huang was the author of the article: Consistent
Laprade was not a reviewer of the article: Yes
Farkas was a primary reviewer of the article: No
Borsky was the secondary reviewer of the article.: No
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
60% (01:49) correct
40%
(01:49)
wrong
based on 774
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Suppose that Farkas and Kenyatta were both selected as reviewers for a certain recently submitted article. For each of the following statements, select Yes if the statement must be true, based on this supposition and the information provided. Otherwise, select No.
| Yes | No | |
| Laprade was not a reviewer of the article | ||
| Farkas was a primary reviewer of the article | ||
| Borsky was the secondary reviewer of the article. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Laprade was not a reviewer of the article: Yes
Farkas was a primary reviewer of the article: No
Borsky was the secondary reviewer of the article.: No
19 May 2024, 09:54
Kudos
Bookmarks
The three tabs give us the following info:
Journal: The editor has the article peer-reviewed by exactly three experts, none of whom authored or coauthored the article.
Review Rules:
- Each submitted article must be peer-reviewed by two primary reviewers and one secondary reviewer.
- The specialization of the primary reviewers must be in the general subject area of the submitted article.
- The specialization of the secondary reviewer must be in a general subject area different from that of the submitted article.
- None of the reviewers of a submitted article may have the same institutional affiliation as the article’s author.
Reviews/Authors: This gives the details of each author.
Question 1. Suppose that Borsky has recently authored an article that has been peer-reviewed by Metathesis. With this supposition, the information provided does NOT imply that which one of the following is FALSE?
Look for an option that need not be false, and scan the tab 3 keeping in mind the rules given in tab 2.
Borsky - PQR University - Modernist: So, reviewers cannot be from PQR university, so only ABC and XYZ left....Anyone with PQR university has to be false, and will not be the answer.
Eliminate the options that have authors Huang and Kenyatta as they both are from PQR university.
Poundstone was a primary reviewer and Kenyatta the secondary reviewer.
Nichols was a primary reviewer and Kenyatta the secondary reviewer.
Kenyatta was a primary reviewer and Nichols the secondary reviewer.
Nichols was a primary reviewer and Farkas the secondary reviewer....CORRECT
Poundstone was a primary reviewer and Huang the secondary reviewer.
Question 2. Suppose that all three reviewers for a certain recently submitted article were from the same university. For each of the following statements, select Consistent if the supposition, together with the information provided, does NOT imply that the statement is FALSE. Otherwise, select Not consistent.
Look for an option that need not be false, and scan the tab 3 keeping in mind the rules given in tab 2.
As there are three reviewers, authors from XYZ would not fit in as there are only two of them.
# Amaros was a primary reviewer of the article: Can be true, as there are three from the ABC institution, and two different specializations are available. Laprade could be other primary reviewer and Farkas or Pounstone could be the secondary reviewer.
# Huang was the secondary reviewer of the article: The primary reviewer could be Borsky and Kenyatta who are from same institution but different field of specialization. Can be true
# Huang was the author of the article: Then Amaros and Laprade could be the primary reviewer and Farkas or Pounstone could be the secondary reviewer...Can be true
Question 3. Suppose that Farkas and Kenyatta were both selected as reviewers for a certain recently submitted article. For each of the following statements, select Yes if the statement must be true, based on this supposition and the information provided. Otherwise, select No.
Farkas - ABC University - Postcolonial
Kenyatta - PQR University - Modernist
Analysis
(a) Thus, an author from XYZ institution is the author and has a field of specialization from Post-colonial or Modernist.
(b) Also the third reviewer has to be from these two specialization.
# Laprade was not a reviewer of the article: Not from Post-colonial or Modernist. Hence yes, ..point (b) above.
# Farkas was a primary reviewer of the article: Need not be true. Depends on who the author is....Hence, no
# Borsky was the secondary reviewer of the article: Need not be true. Depends on who the author is....Hence, no
Journal: The editor has the article peer-reviewed by exactly three experts, none of whom authored or coauthored the article.
Review Rules:
- Each submitted article must be peer-reviewed by two primary reviewers and one secondary reviewer.
- The specialization of the primary reviewers must be in the general subject area of the submitted article.
- The specialization of the secondary reviewer must be in a general subject area different from that of the submitted article.
- None of the reviewers of a submitted article may have the same institutional affiliation as the article’s author.
Reviews/Authors: This gives the details of each author.
Question 1. Suppose that Borsky has recently authored an article that has been peer-reviewed by Metathesis. With this supposition, the information provided does NOT imply that which one of the following is FALSE?
Look for an option that need not be false, and scan the tab 3 keeping in mind the rules given in tab 2.
Borsky - PQR University - Modernist: So, reviewers cannot be from PQR university, so only ABC and XYZ left....Anyone with PQR university has to be false, and will not be the answer.
Eliminate the options that have authors Huang and Kenyatta as they both are from PQR university.
Poundstone was a primary reviewer and Kenyatta the secondary reviewer.
Nichols was a primary reviewer and Kenyatta the secondary reviewer.
Kenyatta was a primary reviewer and Nichols the secondary reviewer.
Nichols was a primary reviewer and Farkas the secondary reviewer....CORRECT
Poundstone was a primary reviewer and Huang the secondary reviewer.
Question 2. Suppose that all three reviewers for a certain recently submitted article were from the same university. For each of the following statements, select Consistent if the supposition, together with the information provided, does NOT imply that the statement is FALSE. Otherwise, select Not consistent.
Look for an option that need not be false, and scan the tab 3 keeping in mind the rules given in tab 2.
As there are three reviewers, authors from XYZ would not fit in as there are only two of them.
# Amaros was a primary reviewer of the article: Can be true, as there are three from the ABC institution, and two different specializations are available. Laprade could be other primary reviewer and Farkas or Pounstone could be the secondary reviewer.
# Huang was the secondary reviewer of the article: The primary reviewer could be Borsky and Kenyatta who are from same institution but different field of specialization. Can be true
# Huang was the author of the article: Then Amaros and Laprade could be the primary reviewer and Farkas or Pounstone could be the secondary reviewer...Can be true
Question 3. Suppose that Farkas and Kenyatta were both selected as reviewers for a certain recently submitted article. For each of the following statements, select Yes if the statement must be true, based on this supposition and the information provided. Otherwise, select No.
Farkas - ABC University - Postcolonial
Kenyatta - PQR University - Modernist
Analysis
(a) Thus, an author from XYZ institution is the author and has a field of specialization from Post-colonial or Modernist.
(b) Also the third reviewer has to be from these two specialization.
# Laprade was not a reviewer of the article: Not from Post-colonial or Modernist. Hence yes, ..point (b) above.
# Farkas was a primary reviewer of the article: Need not be true. Depends on who the author is....Hence, no
# Borsky was the secondary reviewer of the article: Need not be true. Depends on who the author is....Hence, no
20 May 2024, 07:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
kimsia
Make matrix like below and compare it with conditions in the question stem and solve.
Categories \ Universities ABC PQR XYZ
Comparitive A, L H
Modernist P B, K N
Postcolonial F D
