A team of researchers from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology studied the effects of yogurt on mating. The researchers took a group of 40 male mice and 40 female mice and either fed the animals a high-fat, low-fiber, low-nutrient diet meant to mimic junk food or fed them standard mouse meals. They then supplemented half of each diet group with vanilla-flavored yogurt.In mating experiments, yogurt-eating males inseminated their partners faster and produced more offspring than control mice. Conversely, females that ate the yogurt diets gave birth to larger litters and weaned those pups with greater success. The researchers concluded that the probiotic microbes in the yogurt help to make the animals leaner and healthier, which indirectly improves sexual machismo.
Which of the following if true, would most weaken the conclusion reached by the researchers?
understanding the argument :
-group A was fed junk food
-group B was fed mouse meal
-half of A was given yogurt and half was not
-half of B was given yogurt and half was not
result : mice with yogurt faster sex than mice without yogurt
conclusion : pro biotic in yogurt >> lean body and healthy>> increases sex drive
NOTE: this is a TYPICAL GMAT comparison study question. Most of the time when we have to weaken the conlusion try to attack the control group because that is the least explicitly mentioned and that is where the argument tries to exploit.
Apply 2 part analysis : whenever we are explicitly provided with results of one group , attack the non explicit group.
Think: we are told that HALF of both A and B were given yogurt and the half were sex crazy. What are we comparing these groups to?? the non yogurt groups ... if the non yogurt group due to some reason (we dont care about the reason...they may as well be inherently weak) was weak and had low sex drive then comapratively the yogurt mice will be better right?? in this case with or without the yogurt the half group(not the control group) will still be more sex crazy..can we conclude that yogurt had some magic?? NOPE
This was my thinking...
A. Many of the mice in the control group died soon after the experiment.
-
SravnaTestPrep The answer choice could be a little more clear and not confusing. I am not saying that this choice is wrong 100% but it could be worded better and more in line with the student's reasoning. This choice is very ambiguous
reasons:
-many does not mean 50% it could 10% too
- othersin the control group may still be healthy and hence lending strength to the onclusion by making comaprisn valid
- I agree that we do not have to destroy the conclusion outright but still there should atleast be some strong point.
"many "is more like "Some" , it could be "some" (in which case i wouldnt choose this answer)
- if the asn choice used "most" or "more than half" then this choice would be a more appealing choice
-if we try to be conservative and firm on our belief(which students often tend to be) ,they might make a point for options B and C becasue both of these options are close enough to A.
-each of the three choice A B and C have their own assumptions and each can be valid answer IF tried to prove as even some of the great experts seem to second this view
P.S. plesae do not get offended .I am not being condescending. Just a student trying to make a suggestion to an expert. Please do share your views on this. Thankyou
close
