A recent newspaper feature story listed several factors as 'predictors

Different type of ques havent seen before....

A recent newspaper feature story listed several factors as 'predictors' of the likelihood of premature death. Two of these factors were a sedentary lifestyle without regular physical exercise, and sleeping more than 12 hours daily.
If a person, who is trying to avoid premature death, were to respond to this news by both joining an exercise club and buying an alarm clock, that person would probably be:

A) mistaking an explanation for an argument.

B) mistaking an argument for an explanation.

C) mistaking a premise for a conclusion.

D) mistaking a cause for an indicator.

E) mistaking an indicator for a cause.

Please explain why the answer is what it is.

C should be the correct answer

Please correct me if i am wrong.....

The person is not mistaking the premise for a conclusion. The person is DERIVING wrong conclusion from incomplete PREMISE.

Firstly, the NEWSPAPER mentioned SEVERAL, not ALL of the factors of premature death.
Then, the PREMISE mentions only two FACTORS out of the SEVERAL factors of premature death.

These two factors are just a small subset.
The person could mitigate the risk by doing as suggested in the stem, but he/she can't avoid the risk.

"E" is the most appropriate of the lot.

E wins because.
The conclustior(cause) reached by the person on the basis of indicator( bad more sleeping and less exercise)

A sedentary lifestyle without regular physical exercise, and sleeping more than 12 hours daily - Two of the several INDICATORS for premeture death which is the CAUSE

Hence E is the answer

The tone of the question should even give one a clue about the right answer. It seems our longevity seeker, despite his efforts, is mistaking an indicator for a cause. If he weren't, then we cannot even have a GMAT question in the first place.


Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.

5. A recent newspaper feature story listed several factors as 'predictors' of the likelihood of premature death. Two of these factors were a sedentary lifestyle without regular physical exercise, and sleeping more than 12 hours daily.
If a person, who is trying to avoid premature death, were to respond to this news by both joining an exercise club and buying an alarm clock, that person would probably be:

The passage uses the word "factors", implying that sedentary lifestyle and sleepiing more than 12 hours may cause premature death. Thus these two are causes. They are not explanations: eliminate A, not arguments: eliminate B, not premises: eliminate C, not indicators: eliminate E. They are causes: retain D. However the person did not mistake the causes for indicators; on the contrary he recognised the causes and took precautionary meaures. Hence Option D is also wrong.

The question seems to be flawed.

Why is it E and not D. It should be mistaking a cause for an indicator since they are indicators.

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.