Last visit was: 18 May 2024, 22:06 It is currently 18 May 2024, 22:06
Toolkit
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

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.

# A survey of a group of people between the ages of 75 and 80 found that

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 93334
Own Kudos [?]: 624843 [12]
Given Kudos: 81900
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 May 2019
Posts: 785
Own Kudos [?]: 1043 [3]
Given Kudos: 101
Manager
Joined: 16 Dec 2021
Posts: 116
Own Kudos [?]: [0]
Given Kudos: 45
Location: India
GMAT 1: 630 Q45 V31
Director
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 663
Own Kudos [?]: 39 [0]
Given Kudos: 24
A survey of a group of people between the ages of 75 and 80 found that [#permalink]
Understanding the argument - ­
A survey of a group of people between the ages of 75 and 80 found that those who regularly played the card game bridge tended to have better short-term memory than those who did not play bridge. - Correlation.
It was originally concluded from this that playing bridge can help older people to retain and develop their memory. - Hypothesis 1. Some cause-and-effect relationships.
However, it may well be that bridge is simply a more enjoyable game for people who already have good short-term memory and who are thus more inclined to play. - Conclusion. Alternate Hypothesis. Opposite cause and effect.

In countering the original conclusion the reasoning above uses which one of the following techniques?

(A) challenging the representativeness of the sample surveyed - No.

(B) conceding the suggested relationship between playing bridge and short-term memory, but questioning whether any conclusion about appropriate therapy can be drawn - No.

(C) arguing that the original conclusion relied on an inaccurate understanding of the motives that the people surveyed have for playing bridge - No. "motives that the people surveyed " is out of scope.

(D) providing an alternative hypothesis to explain the data on which the original conclusion was based - ok.

(E) describing a flaw in the reasoning on which the original conclusion was based. - Had option E been correct, the reasoning would have looked like this: "The conclusion is flawed because it assumes a cause-effect relationship based solely on correlation. This could involve pointing out that just because two things occur together (bridge playing and better memory) does not mean one causes the other, without considering other variables that might influence this relationship, such as pre-existing cognitive abilities or a selection bias where individuals with better memory might choose to play bridge." The reasoning is nothing like this. It doesn't highlight that it's flawed bla blah..it just shares the alternate hypothesis. ­
A survey of a group of people between the ages of 75 and 80 found that [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6929 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts