November 18, 2018  November 18, 2018 07:00 AM PST 09:00 AM PST Get personalized insights on how to achieve your Target Quant Score. November 18th, 7 AM PST November 20, 2018 November 20, 2018 09:00 AM PST 10:00 AM PST The reward for signing up with the registration form and attending the chat is: 6 free examPAL quizzes to practice your new skills after the chat.
|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 11 Jul 2013
Posts: 33
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
 13 Jun 2014, 07:19
KyleWiddison wrote: voodoochild wrote: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking doors at its entrance. In the town of Inverness, on the other hand, the entrances to nearly all banks are equipped with two sets of locking doors, operated by a mechanism that allows only one set of doors to be open at a time. It is clear, then, that banks in Inverness experience more robbery attempts than do those in La Rinconada, and have thus adopted the extra doors as a security measure. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above? a) Last year the number of bank robberies in La Rinconada was almost one-half greater than the corresponding figure for the previous year. b) Inverness is known for its harsh winters, while the climate of La Rinconada is quite temperate year-round. c) The mechanism of the double doors used by banks in Inverness allows bank security personnel to lock the doors remotely. d) Bank robbery attempts are typically unsuccessful, and, even when the robbers do manage to escape with stolen money, the sum is usually quite small. e) Inverness has almost twice as many police officers per capita as does La Rinconada. Why is A) not a weakener? If the # of bank robberies in La Rin is > that in Inverness, the security is obviously out of question. I'm responding to a PM on this one. I will start by saying the correct answer will be more logical to people who live in climates where double doors are used to maintain inside temperatures, but you can get to the answer by working through your CR process. Assumptions fill in the logical gaps between premises and conclusions. If you want to weaken an argument you need to attack an assumption. In this question the premises state that Inverness has double doors and La Rinconada has single doors. The conclusion states that the double doors were for robbery prevention against Inverness' higher robbery rate. How do we get from double doors to robbery? We are assuming that the double doors are a method for preventing robbery (this is the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion). Answer choices A, D, and E can quickly be eliminated for irrelevance to the issue of doors and robbery prevention. Since the correct answer is B, let's first analyze C. Choice C states that the double doors can be locked remotely. That seems to strengthen the assumption that the double doors are for robbery prevention. That choice feels very relevant to the argument but it's relevant in the wrong direction. We are trying to weaken the argument so we have to attack the assumption that doors are for robbery prevention, not strengthen it. That only leaves us with choice B. Again, I will admit this requires a bit of a mental stretch for some, but can you think of the impact that climate has on door selection or use? Sure, when it's warm I sometimes leave my door open, but when it's cold or stormy I will absolutely close my door. This choice does provide information to suggest that the double doors may not have been installed for robbery prevention and instead as a protection against climate. Don't be too quick to call some answer choices like this one out of scope. These questions can introduce new information not previously stated in the argument. The question is whether that new information attacks an assumption and therefore weakens the argument. KW may be managers are too lazy and may be that is the reason for them to have 2 doors that can closed remotely
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2014
Posts: 324
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Jan 2016, 13:32
KyleWiddison wrote: voodoochild wrote: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking doors at its entrance. In the town of Inverness, on the other hand, the entrances to nearly all banks are equipped with two sets of locking doors, operated by a mechanism that allows only one set of doors to be open at a time. It is clear, then, that banks in Inverness experience more robbery attempts than do those in La Rinconada, and have thus adopted the extra doors as a security measure. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above? a) Last year the number of bank robberies in La Rinconada was almost one-half greater than the corresponding figure for the previous year. b) Inverness is known for its harsh winters, while the climate of La Rinconada is quite temperate year-round. c) The mechanism of the double doors used by banks in Inverness allows bank security personnel to lock the doors remotely. d) Bank robbery attempts are typically unsuccessful, and, even when the robbers do manage to escape with stolen money, the sum is usually quite small. e) Inverness has almost twice as many police officers per capita as does La Rinconada. Why is A) not a weakener? If the # of bank robberies in La Rin is > that in Inverness, the security is obviously out of question. I'm responding to a PM on this one. I will start by saying the correct answer will be more logical to people who live in climates where double doors are used to maintain inside temperatures, but you can get to the answer by working through your CR process. Assumptions fill in the logical gaps between premises and conclusions. If you want to weaken an argument you need to attack an assumption. In this question the premises state that Inverness has double doors and La Rinconada has single doors. The conclusion states that the double doors were for robbery prevention against Inverness' higher robbery rate. How do we get from double doors to robbery? We are assuming that the double doors are a method for preventing robbery (this is the logical gap between the premises and the conclusion). Answer choices A, D, and E can quickly be eliminated for irrelevance to the issue of doors and robbery prevention. Since the correct answer is B, let's first analyze C. Choice C states that the double doors can be locked remotely. That seems to strengthen the assumption that the double doors are for robbery prevention. That choice feels very relevant to the argument but it's relevant in the wrong direction. We are trying to weaken the argument so we have to attack the assumption that doors are for robbery prevention, not strengthen it. That only leaves us with choice B. Again, I will admit this requires a bit of a mental stretch for some, but can you think of the impact that climate has on door selection or use? Sure, when it's warm I sometimes leave my door open, but when it's cold or stormy I will absolutely close my door. This choice does provide information to suggest that the double doors may not have been installed for robbery prevention and instead as a protection against climate. Don't be too quick to call some answer choices like this one out of scope. These questions can introduce new information not previously stated in the argument. The question is whether that new information attacks an assumption and therefore weakens the argument. KW I agree with the post 2 above; not to attack the quality of the question but between B and C, B seems incredibly irrelevant unless you have specific knowledge of architecture and climate control which seems like something the GMAT would never expect you to have while C at least has a logical assumption that either the remote factor means guards don't need to be in the banks (weakening security rather than strengthening) or they're just lazy. Either of those assumption (with the former being the better of the two) would to some degree be a fair conclusion based off of given information when compared to B which is such a specific piece of knowledge (that double doors are needed for colder climates) I can't imagine the GMAT expecting you to know this without any kind of way to reason it.
_________________
Please help me find my lost Kudo's bird
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 22 Feb 2016
Posts: 92
Location: India
Concentration: Economics, Healthcare
GMAT 1: 690 Q42 V47 GMAT 2: 710 Q47 V39
GPA: 3.57
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
05 Dec 2016, 08:28
nirakrish wrote: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking doors at its entrance. In the town of Inverness, on the other hand, the entrances to nearly all banks are equipped with two sets of locking doors, operated by a mechanism that allows only one set of doors to be open at a time. It is clear, then, that banks in Inverness experience more robbery attempts than do those in La Rinconada, and have thus adopted the extra doors as a security measure.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
a) Last year the number of bank robberies in La Rinconada was almost one-half greater than the corresponding figure for the previous year. Incorrect - does not talk anything about the town of Inverness.
b) Inverness is known for its harsh winters, while the climate of La Rinconada is quite temperate year-round. Correct - Inverness banks have two doors to manage the temperature inside the bank and they are not specifically meant to control robbery. It has a direct effect on the conclusion.
c) The mechanism of the double doors used by banks in Inverness allows bank security personnel to lock the doors remotely. Incorrect - looks like the answer but not. Although it looks like an alternative reason, locking remotely or manually does not matter. The point does not weaken the conclusion.
d) Bank robbery attempts are typically unsuccessful, and, even when the robbers do manage to escape with stolen money, the sum is usually quite small. Incorrect - does not weaken. sum of money does not matter.
e) Inverness has almost twice as many police officers per capita as does La Rinconada. Incorrect - number of police officers does not affect the conclusion. This is the reasoning cited by Manhatten but I really don't understand how is B not an out of scope question. I agree it is the only feasible option on applying POE but still B does not look healthy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 01 Sep 2016
Posts: 64
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
21 Jan 2017, 05:45
Thank you again for this amazing explanation.I fell for C daagh wrote: The point here is that the conclusion says that the double- door system is a security measure. We need to weaken this thinking. So, any choice that augments the security aspect is irrelevant. We need to look a totally different reason other than security against robbery or any such things. Therefore, B simply weighs in. We can ignore C, because it strengthens the argument that extra security measures are required in the second town
B is the correct choice
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 08 Jul 2017
Posts: 2
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Jul 2017, 20:42
ravstime wrote: B clearly is the winner.
It provides different cause than that mentioned in the Premise. The author while arriving at a conclusion believe that only 1 cause can lead to the effect. If different cause is having the same intended effect, author's conclusion will gets weakened. Hu ravstime, " If a different cause is having the same intended effect, author's conclusion will get weakened." is the thumb rule for getting answer choice for Weaken questions. However, you can't fully justify the reason B is correct. It is very far fetched to bring the temperature aspect in this passage. What if I claim that Option C is valid because controlling the doors is the new technology the country has brought upon trial basis and has no relevance with the robbery. As mentioned earlier somewhere in the page, the bank can have pre-installed temperature controlled equipment which will nullify the temperature difference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 05 Nov 2014
Posts: 107
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.75
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Jul 2017, 21:32
Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking doors at its entrance. In the town of Inverness, on the other hand, the entrances to nearly all banks are equipped with two sets of locking doors, operated by a mechanism that allows only one set of doors to be open at a time. It is clear, then, that banks in Inverness experience more robbery attempts than do those in La Rinconada, and have thus adopted the extra doors as a security measure.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
a) Last year the number of bank robberies in La Rinconada was almost one-half greater than the corresponding figure for the previous year.
b) Inverness is known for its harsh winters, while the climate of La Rinconada is quite temperate year-round.
c) The mechanism of the double doors used by banks in Inverness allows bank security personnel to lock the doors remotely.
d) Bank robbery attempts are typically unsuccessful, and, even when the robbers do manage to escape with stolen money, the sum is usually quite small.
e) Inverness has almost twice as many police officers per capita as does La Rinconada.
Error Analysis:
In a weaken question, we may either weaken the assumption directly or provide an alternate reason.
In this argument, the comparison is made between the type of doors provided at La Rinconada and Inverness. The reason provided for the double door is the security purpose.
If we are able to provide an alternate reason or weaken the assumption made by the author, we are sorted.!!!
Option A- Irrelevant as it compares robberies at La Rinconada during last year and previous year.
Option B. Correct, as it provides an alternative reason.
Option C- Strengthens the argument. Opposite.
Option D- Irrelevant again.
Option E-Irrelevant. Doesn't address the issue.
Therefore the answer is Option B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 05 Nov 2014
Posts: 107
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.75
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Jul 2017, 21:34
Rosicky wrote: ravstime wrote: B clearly is the winner.
It provides different cause than that mentioned in the Premise. The author while arriving at a conclusion believe that only 1 cause can lead to the effect. If different cause is having the same intended effect, author's conclusion will gets weakened. Hu ravstime, " If a different cause is having the same intended effect, author's conclusion will get weakened." is the thumb rule for getting answer choice for Weaken questions. However, you can't fully justify the reason B is correct. It is very far fetched to bring the temperature aspect in this passage. What if I claim that Option C is valid because controlling the doors is the new technology the country has brought upon trial basis and has no relevance with the robbery. As mentioned earlier somewhere in the page, the bank can have pre-installed temperature controlled equipment which will nullify the temperature difference. Option C is strengthening and not weakening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: Manager to Damager!
Affiliations: MBA
Joined: 22 May 2014
Posts: 68
Location: United States
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
09 Aug 2017, 06:00
I think it is a bad question..
Only the one who has experienced/lived in cold countries can really grasp the meaning of the option B.
Someone who is living in warm country can never understand the logic behind two doors! He/She will immediately eliminate the option B!
And such questions donot appear in official GMAT !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1317
Location: Malaysia
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
16 Sep 2017, 21:56
voodoochild wrote: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking doors at its entrance. In the town of Inverness, on the other hand, the entrances to nearly all banks are equipped with two sets of locking doors, operated by a mechanism that allows only one set of doors to be open at a time. It is clear, then, that banks in Inverness experience more robbery attempts than do those in La Rinconada, and have thus adopted the extra doors as a security measure.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?
(A) Last year the number of bank robberies in La Rinconada was almost one-half greater than the corresponding figure for the previous year.
(B) Inverness is known for its harsh winters, while the climate of La Rinconada is quite temperate year-round.
(C) The mechanism of the double doors used by banks in Inverness allows bank security personnel to lock the doors remotely.
(D) Bank robbery attempts are typically unsuccessful, and, even when the robbers do manage to escape with stolen money, the sum is usually quite small.
(E) Inverness has almost twice as many police officers per capita as does La Rinconada. OFFICIAL EXPLANATION (1) Identify the Question Type The question asks us to weaken the argument presented, so this is a Weaken the Conclusion question. (2) Deconstruct the Argument The argument attempts to explain why almost all banks in Inverness have separately locking double doors, in contrast to the total lack of such doors in the town of La Rinconada. The argument concludes that the double doors must be an extra security measure against crime, and that, by extension, the rate of the relevant crime (here, bank robbery) must be higher in Inverness than in La Rinconada. (3) State the Goal For Weaken questions, we have to find an answer that makes the conclusion at least a little less likely to be true or valid. The explanation presented in the argument does seem reasonable - certainly, one reason for using double doors could be security concerns. The argument can be attacked, though, on the grounds that it claims this must be the reason. If there are other possible reasons for using the double doors, then the claim that the doors are used due to security concerns and a higher robbery rate becomes less likely to be true. (4) Work from Wrong to Right (A) The year-over-year growth rate of bank robberies in La Rinconada alone is not helpful in making a comparison between La Rinconada and another town. (B) CORRECT. The door mechanism in Inverness creates an effective barrier against harsh winter winds and cold air: At no point will both sets of doors be open at the same time, so the introduction of cold air into the bank will be minimized relative to a typical single door opening. This choice thus provides an alternative rationale for the presence of the double doors, weakening the force of the original conclusion. (C) This choice actually strengthens the argument: If the double doors are equipped with such a feature, it becomes more reasonable to speculate that they were installed as a safeguard against crime. Also, this choice can be eliminated immediately on the grounds that it doesn't distinguish at all between the two towns, and thus provides no reason for the door system to be present in Inverness but not also in La Rinconada. (D) This choice does not address the argument's conclusion: the reason for the presence of double doors in Inverness banks and the lack of double doors in La Rinconada banks. (E) The proportion of citizens who are police officers does not provide meaningful information about bank-robbery rates in the two towns, or about the reason for the presence of double doors in Inverness banks and the lack of double doors in La Rinconada banks.
_________________
"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."
“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”
"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."
Rules for posting in verbal forum | Please DO NOT post short answer in your post!
Advanced Search : https://gmatclub.com/forum/advanced-search/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 30 Aug 2017
Posts: 87
Location: Korea, Republic of
GPA: 3.68
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
02 Dec 2017, 22:16
How can I find relationship between two door and weather?
Why only me think it as a problem.
I feel frustrated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2016
Posts: 125
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Dec 2017, 16:26
Really Strange OA.
How would we know that double doors are used as thermostats? Or are temperature regulators or help keep the inside room warm?
C maybe the closest.
At least in C we can assume that the double doors system is not used for security but for convenience.Controlling it remotely by no way means that they would be much secure. What if the lock system is compromised for the sake of convenience?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Each bank in the town of La Rinconada has only a single set of locking &nbs
[#permalink]
25 Dec 2017, 16:26
|
|
|
|
|
Go to page
Previous
1 2
[ 31 posts ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
close
