Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
26 Dec 2022, 02:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
71% (02:09) correct
29%
(02:21)
wrong
based on 514
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Data related to the past 30 years reveals some interesting insights about the propensity of a country to go into a war. Over the past 30 years, the countries that maintained the highest military strengths were also more aggressively involved in a higher number of wars. Moreover, the likelihood of getting aggressively involved in a war increased for countries whose military strength increased significantly during this period. Since there was no major world-wide war phenomenon in the recent past, it is likely that an increased military strength causes the increase in aggressive behavior and the higher involvement in wars.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. The data doesn’t distinguish between the countries that were consistently involved in war and the countries that were involved in more wars during the beginning and end of the 30-year period.
B. Some countries cited in the data were rarely involved in any war
C. Data shows that none of the countries that had zero increase in military strength showed any increase in their involvement in wars.
D. Situations that trigger an increase in military strength such as political tensions with neighboring countries are also likely to increase a country’s propensity to become involved in wars.
E. Data related to some of these countries is available only for a partial duration out of the 30-year period
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. The data doesn’t distinguish between the countries that were consistently involved in war and the countries that were involved in more wars during the beginning and end of the 30-year period.
B. Some countries cited in the data were rarely involved in any war
C. Data shows that none of the countries that had zero increase in military strength showed any increase in their involvement in wars.
D. Situations that trigger an increase in military strength such as political tensions with neighboring countries are also likely to increase a country’s propensity to become involved in wars.
E. Data related to some of these countries is available only for a partial duration out of the 30-year period
26 Jan 2023, 10:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
Data related to the past 30 years reveals some interesting insights about the propensity of a country to go into a war. Over the past 30 years, the countries that maintained the highest military strengths were also more aggressively involved in a higher number of wars. Moreover, the likelihood of getting aggressively involved in a war increased for countries whose military strength increased significantly during this period. Since there was no major world-wide war phenomenon in the recent past, it is likely that an increased military strength causes the increase in aggressive behavior and the higher involvement in wars.
Argument Flow --> increase in miltary strength -- increase in aggressive behaviour -- increased propensity for invilvement in wars
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. The data doesn’t distinguish between the countries that were consistently involved in war and the countries that were involved in more wars during the beginning and end of the 30-year period.
focusses on methods used to reach the argument; hence, no impact ie, neither strengthen nor weaken; in fact strengthens the argument mildly, since it highlights data neutrality
B. Some countries cited in the data were rarely involved in any war
Irrelevant owing to the emphasis on only 'some' countries; hence, NOT representative
C. Data shows that none of the countries that had zero increase in military strength showed any increase in their involvement in wars.
If zero increase in military strength--> no increase in involvement in wars; it strengthens the given argument's line of reasoning
D. Situations that trigger an increase in military strength such as political tensions with neighboring countries are also likely to increase a country’s propensity to become involved in wars.
external factor involved to impact the line of reasoning; hence, out of scope
E. Data related to some of these countries is available only for a partial duration out of the 30-year period
weakens the conclusion, as it highlights the weakness in data collection
(D) is the correct option
Argument Flow --> increase in miltary strength -- increase in aggressive behaviour -- increased propensity for invilvement in wars
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. The data doesn’t distinguish between the countries that were consistently involved in war and the countries that were involved in more wars during the beginning and end of the 30-year period.
focusses on methods used to reach the argument; hence, no impact ie, neither strengthen nor weaken; in fact strengthens the argument mildly, since it highlights data neutrality
B. Some countries cited in the data were rarely involved in any war
Irrelevant owing to the emphasis on only 'some' countries; hence, NOT representative
C. Data shows that none of the countries that had zero increase in military strength showed any increase in their involvement in wars.
If zero increase in military strength--> no increase in involvement in wars; it strengthens the given argument's line of reasoning
D. Situations that trigger an increase in military strength such as political tensions with neighboring countries are also likely to increase a country’s propensity to become involved in wars.
external factor involved to impact the line of reasoning; hence, out of scope
E. Data related to some of these countries is available only for a partial duration out of the 30-year period
weakens the conclusion, as it highlights the weakness in data collection
(D) is the correct option
11 Nov 2024, 21:52
Kudos
Bookmarks
Increase in military strength => increase in aggressive behavior => higher involvement in wars/
To strengthen this argument, we need evidence that directly supports a causal link between increased military strength and higher war involvement.
(A) The data doesn’t distinguish between the countries that were consistently involved in war and the countries that were involved in more wars during the beginning and end of the 30-year period.
This choice provides additional detail about the data's structure, but it does not support the causal relationship between increased military strength and war involvement. It neither strengthens nor weakens the argument. Incorrect
(B) Some countries cited in the data were rarely involved in any war.
This statement is irrelevant to the argument’s causal claim. The fact that some countries were rarely involved in wars doesn’t impact the argument about countries with increasing military strength being more likely to engage in war. If anything this rather weakens the argument as the countries cited in the data had less propensity of being involved in a war. Eliminate B.
(C) Data shows that none of the countries that had zero increase in military strength showed any increase in their involvement in wars.
This option strongly supports the argument. If countries with no increase in military strength also showed no increase in war involvement, this supports the idea that military buildup is linked to a higher propensity for war. It implies that without a military increase, the tendency to engage in war does not rise, reinforcing the argument’s causation claim. Correct
(D) Situations that trigger an increase in military strength such as political tensions with neighboring countries are also likely to increase a country’s propensity to become involved in wars.
This choice suggests an alternative explanation, where political tensions (not military strength) might be the cause of increased war involvement. This weakens the argument by introducing a factor that could account for both the increase in military strength and the likelihood of war, implying that military strength itself may not be the direct cause. Incorrect
(E) Data related to some of these countries is available only for a partial duration out of the 30-year period.
This choice suggests a limitation in the data but does not address the argument’s causal link. Partial data for some countries neither supports nor undermines the proposed connection between military strength and war involvement. Incorrect
To strengthen this argument, we need evidence that directly supports a causal link between increased military strength and higher war involvement.
(A) The data doesn’t distinguish between the countries that were consistently involved in war and the countries that were involved in more wars during the beginning and end of the 30-year period.
This choice provides additional detail about the data's structure, but it does not support the causal relationship between increased military strength and war involvement. It neither strengthens nor weakens the argument. Incorrect
(B) Some countries cited in the data were rarely involved in any war.
This statement is irrelevant to the argument’s causal claim. The fact that some countries were rarely involved in wars doesn’t impact the argument about countries with increasing military strength being more likely to engage in war. If anything this rather weakens the argument as the countries cited in the data had less propensity of being involved in a war. Eliminate B.
(C) Data shows that none of the countries that had zero increase in military strength showed any increase in their involvement in wars.
This option strongly supports the argument. If countries with no increase in military strength also showed no increase in war involvement, this supports the idea that military buildup is linked to a higher propensity for war. It implies that without a military increase, the tendency to engage in war does not rise, reinforcing the argument’s causation claim. Correct
(D) Situations that trigger an increase in military strength such as political tensions with neighboring countries are also likely to increase a country’s propensity to become involved in wars.
This choice suggests an alternative explanation, where political tensions (not military strength) might be the cause of increased war involvement. This weakens the argument by introducing a factor that could account for both the increase in military strength and the likelihood of war, implying that military strength itself may not be the direct cause. Incorrect
(E) Data related to some of these countries is available only for a partial duration out of the 30-year period.
This choice suggests a limitation in the data but does not address the argument’s causal link. Partial data for some countries neither supports nor undermines the proposed connection between military strength and war involvement. Incorrect
