Barrys Barbecue is a restaurant chain that advertises itself as

Question

Barry’s Barbecue is a restaurant chain that advertises itself as a safe place for diners with food allergies to eat. At Barry’s, whenever a diner books a reservation and mentions a food allergy, the kitchen staff is prohibited from preparing multiple dishes on the same grill. This ensures that there is no cross-contamination between dishes, but also can result in longer wait times as fewer meals can be prepared than would be the case under normal circumstances.

A. The kitchen staff at Barry’s sometimes prepares multiple dishes on the same grill.

It is clearly stated that whenever a diner books a reservation and mentions a food allergy, the kitchen staff is prohibited from preparing multiple dishes on the same grill.

Answer: A.

Which of the following is best supported by the information above?

A. The kitchen staff at Barry’s sometimes prepares multiple dishes on the same grill.

B. Barry’s will not make special kitchen accommodations for diners who do not make a reservation.

C. Not all restaurants follow food allergy precautions to avoid cross-contamination between multiple dishes.

D. Limiting cross-contamination from multiple dishes on the same grill is the most effective way to avoid issues for diners with food allergies.

E. Diners with food allergies are generally willing to be patient with longer wait times in order to avoid cross-contamination between dishes.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:

Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Sentence Correction Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Integrated Reasoning Butler

Purnank · Answer

I think A.   Because of " At Barry’s,  whenever  a diner books a reservation and  mentions a food allergy,  the  kitchen staff is prohibited  from preparing  multiple dishes on the same grill ."

But i think option E is also close because of this "This ensures that there is no cross-contamination between dishes,  but also can result in longer wait times  as fewer meals can be prepared than would be the case under normal circumstances." But it doesnt says anything about willingness so i am eliminating E.

Any thoughts?

Matthyrou · Answer

i think it would be b, I agree with you that a is for me an assumption from the text. But for me, b is a stronger assumption, because it's written, that they will provide special kitchen accomodation "only" under reservation, so be for me its opposite (so true in a way)

Purnank · Answer

only? where they mentioned?
 Plus one more reason i feel B is not working here is, "At Barry’s,   whenever a diner books a reservation    and    mentions a food allergy,   the kitchen staff is prohibited from preparing multiple dishes on the same grill." means if we think here in relation of cause and effect, both, reservation and food allergy are important to lead effect of prohibition. And B is only talking about reservation. Thats why i eliminated B.

EshaFatim · Answer

I am confused between A and D.

"A. The kitchen staff at Barry’s sometimes prepares multiple dishes on the same grill."   - I kept it in hand as an alternative in case there was no better option. The only problem is the word "sometimes" which doesn't seem to resemble the phrase in the last sentence -"would be the case  under normal circumstances ."  "Under   normal circumstances"  sounds more like 'all the time' than  'sometimes' . However, it is indeed an alternative to the correct answer.

"D. Limiting cross-contamination from multiple dishes on the same grill is the most effective way to avoid issues for diners with food allergies."   I hoped to lean more toward this, as Barry's method  ensures  that there's 'NO' cross-contamination. Which seems to me that it has been the best option for them to limit cross-contamination. But there's no proof of success mentioned for this method to be  the most effective  one either. So,  'The most effective'  part as an absolute indication is what bugs me a little.

I guess not choosing the absolute might be a wise choice here. That being said option A might be the answer.

Abdelaali91 · Answer

A. The kitchen staff at Barry’s sometimes prepares multiple dishes on the same grill. 
 The argument states that whenever a person with food allergy makes a reservation at Barry's, the kitchen staff will be prohibited from cooking on the same grill different dishes. This means that when nobody makes such a reservation, kitchen staff is not prohibited from cooking different kinds of dishes one the same grill, and given that it takes less time, the staff probably prepares multiple dishes on the same grill in this case

B. Barry’s will not make special kitchen accommodations for diners who do not make a reservation. 
 Making kitchen accomodations for diners is not conditioned by making a reservation. Only thing here is that when a person makes a reservation in advance he or she is sure of the accomodations.

C. Not all restaurants follow food allergy precautions to avoid cross-contamination between multiple dishes. 
 Out of scope
 
 D. Limiting cross-contamination from multiple dishes on the same grill is the most effective way to avoid issues for diners with food allergies. 
 "Most-effective way" is too strong. Nothing in the argument indicates this is true.

E. Diners with food allergies are generally willing to be patient with longer wait times in order to avoid cross-contamination between dishes. 
 Same as D, nothing in the argument indicates that customers with food-allergies are willing to wait longer times. Maybe if these customers were the majority of the patrons of Barry's ?

prantorboni · Answer

Barry’s Barbecue is a restaurant chain that advertises itself as a safe place for diners with food allergies to eat. At Barry’s, whenever a diner books a reservation and mentions a food allergy, the kitchen staff is prohibited from preparing multiple dishes on the same grill. This ensures that there is no cross-contamination between dishes, but also can result in longer wait times as fewer meals can be prepared than would be the case under normal circumstances.

A. The kitchen staff at Barry’s sometimes prepares multiple dishes on the same grill.

It is clearly stated that whenever a diner books a reservation and mentions a food allergy, the kitchen staff is prohibited from preparing multiple dishes on the same grill.

Answer: A.

A. The kitchen staff at Barry’s sometimes prepares multiple dishes on the same grill.

It is clearly stated that  whenever a diner books a reservation and mentions a food allergy, the kitchen staff is prohibited from preparing multiple dishes on the same grill.

Answer: A.

Bunuel · Answer

VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL SOLUTION:

With Inference questions, the correct answer has to fit the "must be true" standard, meaning that it has to be proven based on the passage; incorrect answers "could be true" but are not necessarily true based only on the information in the passage.

Here choice (A) fits that standard largely because of the phrase "under normal circumstances" at the end of the stimulus. If the prohibition on preparing multiple dishes on the same grill is different from "under normal circumstances," then it must be true that "sometimes" (note: "sometimes" is a very low bar to clear for proof) multiple dishes are prepared on the same grill. Choice (A) is therefore correct.

In contrast, notice the strong language within choice (B), that the restaurant categorically will not make kitchen accommodations (of any type) if a diner does not make a reservation. From the stimulus you know of one particular accommodation that will be made under a reservation, but you cannot conclude that there are no other possible accommodations, or that the restaurant wouldn't try to make that accommodation if someone were to arrive without a reservation.

Choice (C) could possibly be true ("not all" is another low bar of proof) but as this stimulus only tells you about one particular accommodation that one particular restaurant makes, you just do not have evidence to support this. (Note that while "not all" is a low bar, "food allergy precautions" is fairly broad: if every restaurant, for example, takes one small precaution like washing its dishes at high heat, that would be enough to rule out (C).)

Choice (D) is a classic example of an Inference answer choice simply going too far, using "the most effective" when you simply do not have information to rank different precautions.

And choice (E) is another example of a choice that might well be true, but does not have any proof in the stimulus.

egmat · Answer

Great analysis! You actually reasoned your way to the right answer. Let me give you complete clarity on both choices.

Why A is correct: 
Your concern about "sometimes" vs. "under normal circumstances" is actually backwards - these terms  SUPPORT  each other perfectly.

Think about it this way:
- The passage tells us there are  TWO scenarios  at Barry's:
 -  Scenario 1 (Normal):  No allergy mentioned → Multiple dishes on same grill
 -  Scenario 2 (Special):  Allergy mentioned → ONE dish per grill

The passage says  "fewer meals can be prepared than would be the case under normal circumstances."  This comparison  only makes sense  if, under NORMAL circumstances, they DO cook multiple dishes on the same grill.

Now, "sometimes" simply means "not always." Since Scenario 1 (normal) happens whenever there's no allergy mentioned, and Scenario 2 (special) happens when allergies ARE mentioned, the kitchen staff prepares multiple dishes on the same grill  SOME of the time  - specifically, during normal circumstances.

"Sometimes" = normal circumstances = when no allergies are mentioned. Perfect match.

Why D fails: 
You spotted the  trap  correctly!  "Most effective"  is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

The passage tells us: Barry's method ensures NO cross-contamination.

But the passage  NEVER  tells us:
- How this method compares to other methods
- Whether other methods exist
- Whether this is more effective than alternatives

Just because something WORKS doesn't mean it's the BEST or MOST effective.  Maybe there are even better methods we don't know about. The passage simply doesn't give us this comparison.

Your takeaway: 
For Inference questions, the correct answer must be  100%  supported by the passage. Watch out for  superlatives like "most effective"  - they require comparison evidence that often isn't provided.

Answer: A

You reasoned well - trust that instinct about absolutes!

Barrys Barbecue is a restaurant chain that advertises itself as

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Barrys Barbecue is a restaurant chain that advertises itself as

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards