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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
The Target Test Prep GMAT Flash Sale is LIVE! Get 25% off our game-changing course and save up to $450 today! Use code FLASH25 at checkout. This limited-time deal won’t last long, so grab your discount now!
Get a massive $325 off the TTP OnDemand GMAT masterclass by using the coupon code FLASH25 at checkout. If you prefer learning through engaging video lessons, TTP OnDemand GMAT is exactly what you need.
Class is officially in session! Join Charles Bibilos from GMAT Ninja and GMAC’s own Jaime Malatesta, Senior Psychometrician, as they simplify some of the complexities of GMAT scoring.
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.
Join us June 30th for 2 weeks of GMAT questions (just 8 per day) to help with your prep and to compete with your fellow GMAT Clubbers for a chance to win a prize fund of $30,000 for you and your team-mates!
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:
70%
(01:45)
correct 30%
(02:34)
wrong
based on 57
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A multinational corporation recently adopted an artificial intelligence (AI) system to streamline its hiring process. The AI reduced the average hiring time by 30% and cut administrative costs by 25%. However, an independent audit found that the AI system rejected 18% more candidates from underrepresented backgrounds compared to the previous manual process. Despite this, the company’s leadership stated that overall employee diversity remained unchanged after a full year of AI-assisted hiring. Meanwhile, internal reports showed that employee turnover increased by 15% in the same period, particularly among mid-level managers.
Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?
(A) The AI system’s rejection of underrepresented candidates did not significantly affect overall diversity at the company. (B) The AI system is responsible for the increase in employee turnover, particularly among mid-level managers. (C) The reduction in hiring time directly led to cost savings for the company. (D) The AI system improved efficiency but resulted in unintended biases that harmed the company’s diversity efforts. (E) Without the AI system, the company’s employee turnover rate would not have increased.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
✅ Correct Answer: (A) The AI system’s rejection of underrepresented candidates did not significantly affect overall diversity at the company.
Explanation:
The passage states that the AI rejected 18% more underrepresented candidates than before.
However, the company’s leadership confirmed that overall diversity remained unchanged after a full year.
This means that despite the AI rejecting more underrepresented candidates, the overall diversity numbers did not significantly shift—likely because other hiring factors balanced it out.
❌ Why the other options are wrong?
(B) Turnover increased, but no direct link to AI hiring was established. It could be due to other reasons.
(C) Hiring time and cost savings were both mentioned, but we don’t know if one directly caused the other.
(D) The AI showed bias, but since diversity remained the same, the harm to diversity efforts is unclear.
(E) No evidence suggests that turnover wouldn’t have increased without AI. There could be other factors at play.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.