Last visit was: 26 Apr 2024, 02:29 It is currently 26 Apr 2024, 02:29

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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Kudos
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Current Student
Joined: 31 Aug 2016
Status:Valar Dohaeris
Posts: 299
Own Kudos [?]: 916 [12]
Given Kudos: 911
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V37
Send PM
Intern
Intern
Joined: 04 May 2020
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 29 [4]
Given Kudos: 22
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Technology, Healthcare
GMAT 1: 580 Q49 V21
GMAT 2: 690 Q51 V31 (Online)
GMAT 3: 780 Q51 V47 (Online)
GPA: 3.3
Send PM
Current Student
Joined: 31 Aug 2016
Status:Valar Dohaeris
Posts: 299
Own Kudos [?]: 916 [3]
Given Kudos: 911
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V37
Send PM
Retired Moderator
Joined: 05 May 2016
Posts: 790
Own Kudos [?]: 683 [2]
Given Kudos: 1316
Location: India
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
2
Kudos
shauryahanda wrote:
I have a doubt in Q1

between option A and C
option A uses a very extreme wording "No instructions at all"
-> How can we say that the passage referred to absolutely no instructions at all, The product may come with basic set of instructions

On the other hand
option C can form a kind of example that can be the answer



Hi shauryahanda,

For Question 1,consider the lines: "When confronted by some mystifying piece of high-tech gadgetry, consumers naturally feel that there is something wrong with them if they can‘t figure it out. ", these lines imply that when the technology is too complicated for the consumers to understand, they usually end up returning that item. Thus, the direct inference that we can draw is that an ergonomics expert would be likely to place high value on a product that actually doesn't need any instructions.

"no instruction at all to use" might seem a little extreme but that is the most apt inference that one can draw. C is too vague an inference. In my opinion, it's an incorrect wording on option A. I mean if you think about it almost all the products mentioned in the passage can be manipulated by hand, why would an ergonomics expert place his bets on such a product, rather he's place high value on a product that can be easily used.


Hope This Helps.
Thanks.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 12 Feb 2021
Posts: 3
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Hi, why is the 2nd question is A an not E. The last paragraph mentions "When confronted by some mystifying piece of high-tech gadgetry, consumers naturally feel that there is something wrong with them if they can‘t figure it out." ?
Thank you in advance
Manager
Manager
Joined: 14 Jan 2020
Posts: 100
Own Kudos [?]: 17 [1]
Given Kudos: 107
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V37
GPA: 4
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
1
Kudos
I have a doubt in Q1

between option A and C
option A uses a very extreme wording "No instructions at all"
-> How can we say that the passage referred to absolutely no instructions at all, The product may come with basic set of instructions

On the other hand
option C can form a kind of example that can be the answer
LBS Moderator
Joined: 30 Oct 2019
Posts: 836
Own Kudos [?]: 775 [1]
Given Kudos: 1577
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
1
Kudos
ravigupta2912 wrote:
I'm not really able to understand option E in Ques 2. The official explanation doesn't sufficiently explain it.

I feel E is the effect of A and E can come into the picture ONLY if the consumers assume A. If they do not assume A, option E kinda becomes moot.

A. The gadget was designed for ready use by the average consumer.
E. they are not as intelligent as the other person

A is the assumption of the consumers. Consumers think the product is meant for mass-consumption. And when they think they cannot figure it out, they conclude the product to be faulty and return it.

E is not an assumption. Let us negate E - "they are as intelligent as the other person". This doesn't affect the argument, hence cannot be an assumption.

Hope this helps.
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32929 [1]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Official Explanation


1. Based on the passage, an ergonomics expert would be likely to place high value on a product that:

Difficulty Level: 700

Explanation

What do ergonomics experts value? According to Para 5, ease of use. Looking for a product that fits this criterion turns up (A). The example of the watch is helpful in reinforcing this point: the watches weren‘t defective, and presumably had instructions, but they were too complicated for users to understand.

(A): The correct answer

(B): Distortion. Though an ergonomics expert would assert that technology should be easy to use, he wouldn‘t argue that technology should be eliminated altogether.

(C): Out of Scope. Ease of use doesn‘t necessarily indicate manipulation by hand. What about an ergonomic bathroom scale?

(D): Distortion. Though complex tasks should be made simpler, this doesn‘t mean that an ergonomic product has to solve complex tasks on behalf of its user.

(E): Opposite, as described above

Answer: A
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32929 [0]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
Expert Reply
Kelpie wrote:
Hi, why is the 2nd question is A an not E. The last paragraph mentions "When confronted by some mystifying piece of high-tech gadgetry, consumers naturally feel that there is something wrong with them if they can‘t figure it out." ?
Thank you in advance


Official Explanation


2. When consumers feel that there is something wrong with them if they can‘t figure a high-tech gadget out, which of the following assumptions are they making?

Difficulty Level: 750

Explanation

The situation mentioned is identical to that described in Paragraph 6; use the main ideas from it for reference. If a user can‘t operate a product and concludes that the fault is with them, what assumption are they making? That the fault doesn‘t lie with the product. In the context of the passage, products are at fault when they aren‘t designed with average users in mind. Choice (A) ties these ideas together. Using the denial test confirms the assumption: If the gadget wasn‘t designed for ready use by the average consumer, then the user would have no reason to believe that the fault lay with him.

(A): The correct answer

(B): Distortion. Though the technology may have been designed by engineers, the user isn‘t necessarily assuming that no one but engineers can figure it out. As far as he knows, the problem lies only with him.

(C): Opposite. If the user assumed this, then there would be no cause to believe that the fault was his own.

(D): Opposite. As above, if this were assumed, there would be no reason for consumers to believe that something was wrong with them.

(E): This doesn‘t have to be assumed by the consumers.

Answer: A
Manager
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2020
Posts: 51
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 72
Location: India
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
Can anyone provide detailed explanation for rejecting Question 2 optionD.

D. Everyone is equally capable of understanding new technology.

IMO.
A user assumes that everyone is equally capable of understanding new technology. And given this understanding, if he is still not able to operate the latest gadgets or apps then he would think there is something wrong with them.
A user assumes that not everyone has equal capability to understand the new technology then maybe user doesn't think that way.
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32929 [0]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
Expert Reply
HASTOWINGMAT wrote:
Can anyone provide detailed explanation for rejecting Question 2 optionD.

D. Everyone is equally capable of understanding new technology.

IMO.
A user assumes that everyone is equally capable of understanding new technology. And given this understanding, if he is still not able to operate the latest gadgets or apps then he would think there is something wrong with them.
A user assumes that not everyone has equal capability to understand the new technology then maybe user doesn't think that way.


Read the official explanation in the link below

https://gmatclub.com/forum/a-cause-of-f ... l#p2724643

Thank you
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 12 Feb 2021
Posts: 3
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 1
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
vinhkhang20 wrote:
Hi IMO I'll put it this way :

"When confronted by some mystifying piece of high-tech gadgetry, consumers naturally feel that there is something wrong with them if they can‘t figure it out."

When we read this sentence, some of us misread "them" to refer to "consumers", thus we tend to pick the wrong answer as in D & E.
But previously as the para 4 mentioned : "advanced digitals was being returned as defective by the thousands, even though the watches actually worked perfectly well."
So the sentence should read : "When confronted by some mystifying piece of high-tech gadgetry, consumers naturally feel that there is something wrong with the gadgetry if the consumers can‘t figure it out."

Therefore, they assumes as in answer A explain.
This is why we need to really understand the meaning of the passage, not just use a trick of "No/not/negation" in assumption questions.


Thank you for explanation, this helped a lot!
Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2019
Posts: 737
Own Kudos [?]: 263 [0]
Given Kudos: 84
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q46 V34
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V40
GPA: 2.58
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
I'm not really able to understand option E in Ques 2. The official explanation doesn't sufficiently explain it.

I feel E is the effect of A and E can come into the picture ONLY if the consumers assume A. If they do not assume A, option E kinda becomes moot.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 24 Mar 2021
Posts: 2
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 1
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
can anyone give explanation for question 3 answer D
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32929 [0]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
Expert Reply
8824182855 wrote:
can anyone give explanation for question 3 answer D


Official Explanation


3. According to one consumer survey, a third of all VCR owners have given up trying to program their machines for time-delayed viewing. How would the author probably explain this fact?

Difficulty Level: 600

Explanation

How would the author explain a situation in which consumers give up on trying to master a certain technology? The author‘s main purpose is arguing that users do this because the technology isn‘t built around their needs and abilities. Searching for an answer choice that echoes this turns up (D).

(A): Opposite. The author argues that technology should be built around mental models, not the other way around.

(B): Out of Scope. The author isn‘t concerned with what the consumers think about the product as much as with how easily they can use it.

(C): Opposite. The author argues that consumers shouldn‘t have to be technologically savvy to use a common product.

(D): The correct answer

(E): "Aberration" is not the correct explanation.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 27 May 2022
Posts: 1
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 5
Send PM
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
In question 1, why can't we consider option D as it says... (solved complex problems for its user). If it were to be true can we infer from 5th para...
(Charles Mauro, a consultant in New York City, is a prominent member of a branch of engineering generally known as ergonomics, or human- factors—the only field specifically addressing the question of product usability. Mauro was brought in to provide some help to the watch manufacturer, which was experiencing what Mauro calls the "complexity problem." With complexity defined as a fundamental mismatch between the demands of a technology and the capabilities of its user, the term nicely captures the essence of our current technological predicament.).

Can we say from this that (an ergonomics expert would be likely to place high value on a product that: solves such complex problems for its users?
GMAT Club Bot
Re: A cause of fatal mining accidents was once the peculiar configuration [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
13961 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne