Last visit was: 15 Jun 2025, 11:30 It is currently 15 Jun 2025, 11:30
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
User avatar
gmatophobia
User avatar
Quant Chat Moderator
Joined: 22 Dec 2016
Last visit: 12 Jun 2025
Posts: 3,142
Own Kudos:
8,717
 [10]
Given Kudos: 1,860
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Leadership
Products:
Posts: 3,142
Kudos: 8,717
 [10]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
9
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
nikitathegreat
Joined: 16 Dec 2021
Last visit: 15 June 2025
Posts: 197
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 96
Location: India
GMAT 1: 630 Q45 V31
Products:
GMAT 1: 630 Q45 V31
Posts: 197
Kudos: 20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
ap2201
Joined: 11 Feb 2022
Last visit: 27 Apr 2023
Posts: 20
Own Kudos:
8
 [2]
Given Kudos: 17
Posts: 20
Kudos: 8
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
unraveled
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Last visit: 10 Apr 2025
Posts: 2,727
Own Kudos:
2,142
 [1]
Given Kudos: 764
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy)
Posts: 2,727
Kudos: 2,142
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A lack of trust in one's neighbors leads to their lack of respect for the law. A new study provides compelling evidence for this. Neighborhoods in which people routinely lock their doors have higher burglary rates than neighborhoods in which people do not routinely lock their doors.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument

(A) treats something that is merely sufficient to produce a result as if it were necessary to produce that result - WRONG. Neither sufficient nor necessary. The built-up of the passage does not suggest such a thing.

(B) draws a moral conclusion from evidence that could only support a factual conclusion - WRONG. This is what we need to find i.e. which is what. What is moral conclusion and what is factual conclusion? BTW, Is there anything called factual conclusion? Facts can't be conclusion. A conclusion is based on facts.

(C) bases its conclusion on data that are contradictory - WRONG. It's not contradictory.

(D) asserts in a premise what it is trying to establish in its conclusion - WRONG. This is like B. This goes little more weird. How does an assertion precede conclusion when a conclusion establishing is like asserting.

(E) treats what could be the effect of something as if it were the cause of that thing - CORRECT. Causality tested in the passage that is what this choice elaborates. We are not sure whether that study is related to what is stated in the first sentence of the passage.
The author might be making this assumption that since there is a lack of trust among neighbors, they lock their house doors as burglary happen. This suggests neighbors do that without worrying about law. But it is equally possible that that study is responsible for neighbors locking their doors and losing trust. In this case the claim/argument that the lack of trust leading to lack of respect for the law falls apart. It can be either way.

Answer E.
User avatar
Tiffsootmoot8
Joined: 23 Aug 2015
Last visit: 21 May 2025
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
29
 [1]
Given Kudos: 85
Location: India
Posts: 53
Kudos: 29
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
What's the conclusion of the argument?
statement A: "A lack of trust in one's neighbors leads to their lack of respect for the law"
The evidence used to support this is the statement
statement B: "Neighborhoods in which people routinely lock their doors have higher burglary rates than neighborhoods in which people do not routinely lock their doors."

If we take a step back and think, Does statement A lead to statement B or statement B lead to statement A, its clear that lack of trust as mentioned in A leads to the conclusion of B. The argument has got it in reverse and thats why E is the right answer
User avatar
moyojr60
Joined: 06 Aug 2022
Last visit: 30 Nov 2022
Posts: 1
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 1
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The premise is:
not trusting your neighbor leads to burglary i.e making your area unsafe. when in reality if there are no burglaries in your area i.e it's safe, you can trust your neighbors and not lock your doors.
therefore the answer reversed the cause and effect in question.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,379
Own Kudos:
Posts: 18,379
Kudos: 946
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7325 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts