GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 17 Aug 2019, 08:10

### 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

# In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Retired Moderator
Status: Long way to go!
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Posts: 1339
Location: Viet Nam
In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Oct 2017, 03:06
4
9
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

65% (02:28) correct 35% (02:41) wrong based on 370 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through a maze. Some of the rats were blind, others deaf, others lacked a sense of smell, and others had no sensory deficiencies; yet all the rats learned the task in much the same amount of time. Of the senses other than sight, hearing, and smell, only kinesthesia had not previously been shown to be irrelevant to maze-learning. The researcher concluded on the basis of these facts that kinesthesia, the sensation of bodily movement, is sufficient for maze-learning.

The researcher’s reasoning is most vulnerable to which one of the following criticisms?

(A) The small differences in proficiency found by the researcher did not appear to fall into a systematic pattern by group.

(B) The possibility that the interaction of kinesthesia with at least one other sense is required for maze-learning cannot be ruled out on the basis of the data above.

(C) It can be determined from the data that rats who are deprived of one of their sources of sensory stimulation become more reliant on kinesthesia than they had been, but the data do not indicate how such a transference takes place.

(D) It can be determined from the data that rats can learn to run mazes by depending on kinesthesia alone, but the possibility that rats respond to nonkinesthetic stimulation is not ruled out.

(E) It can be determined from the data that maze-learning in rats depends on at least two sources of sensory stimulation, one of which is kinesthesia, but which of the remaining sources must also be employed is not determinable.

Source: LSAT

_________________
Marshall & McDonough Moderator
Joined: 13 Apr 2015
Posts: 1679
Location: India
Re: In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Oct 2017, 19:25
1
Question Type: Weaken

Conclusion: Kinesthesia is sufficient for maze learning.

(A) The small differences in proficiency found by the researcher did not appear to fall into a systematic pattern by group. - Incorrect. Irrelevant.

(B) The possibility that the interaction of kinesthesia with at least one other sense is required for maze-learning cannot be ruled out on the basis of the data above. - Correct. x + Kinesthesia is required for maze learning. So, Kinesthesia alone is not sufficient for maze learning.

(C) It can be determined from the data that rats who are deprived of one of their sources of sensory stimulation become more reliant on kinesthesia than they had been, but the data do not indicate how such a transference takes place. - Incorrect. We are checking whether Kinesthesia is sufficient, not whether rats were more reliant on Kinesthesia.

(D) It can be determined from the data that rats can learn to run mazes by depending on kinesthesia alone, but the possibility that rats respond to nonkinesthetic stimulation is not ruled out. - Incorrect. Opposite.

(E) It can be determined from the data that maze-learning in rats depends on at least two sources of sensory stimulation, one of which is kinesthesia, but which of the remaining sources must also be employed is not determinable. - Out of focus. This option is more concerned on finding the 2nd source responsible for sensory stimulation.

Intern
Joined: 07 Feb 2017
Posts: 25
Re: In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Oct 2017, 15:08
broall wrote:
In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through a maze. Some of the rats were blind, others deaf, others lacked a sense of smell, and others had no sensory deficiencies; yet all the rats learned the task in much the same amount of time. Of the senses other than sight, hearing, and smell, only kinesthesia had not previously been shown to be irrelevant to maze-learning. The researcher concluded on the basis of these facts that kinesthesia, the sensation of bodily movement, is sufficient for maze-learning.

The researcher’s reasoning is most vulnerable to which one of the following criticisms?

(A) The small differences in proficiency found by the researcher did not appear to fall into a systematic pattern by group.

(B) The possibility that the interaction of kinesthesia with at least one other sense is required for maze-learning cannot be ruled out on the basis of the data above.

(C) It can be determined from the data that rats who are deprived of one of their sources of sensory stimulation become more reliant on kinesthesia than they had been, but the data do not indicate how such a transference takes place.

(D) It can be determined from the data that rats can learn to run mazes by depending on kinesthesia alone, but the possibility that rats respond to nonkinesthetic stimulation is not ruled out.

(E) It can be determined from the data that maze-learning in rats depends on at least two sources of sensory stimulation, one of which is kinesthesia, but which of the remaining sources must also be employed is not determinable.

Source: LSAT

E. While B and E both mention that two senses are required, B is doubtful whereas E conclusively says, based on the data.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2386
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Dec 2017, 00:09
broall wrote:
In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through a maze. Some of the rats were blind, others deaf, others lacked a sense of smell, and others had no sensory deficiencies; yet all the rats learned the task in much the same amount of time. Of the senses other than sight, hearing, and smell, only kinesthesia had not previously been shown to be irrelevant to maze-learning. The researcher concluded on the basis of these facts that kinesthesia, the sensation of bodily movement, is sufficient for maze-learning.

The researcher’s reasoning is most vulnerable to which one of the following criticisms?

(A) The small differences in proficiency found by the researcher did not appear to fall into a systematic pattern by group.

(B) The possibility that the interaction of kinesthesia with at least one other sense is required for maze-learning cannot be ruled out on the basis of the data above.

(C) It can be determined from the data that rats who are deprived of one of their sources of sensory stimulation become more reliant on kinesthesia than they had been, but the data do not indicate how such a transference takes place.

(D) It can be determined from the data that rats can learn to run mazes by depending on kinesthesia alone, but the possibility that rats respond to nonkinesthetic stimulation is not ruled out.

(E) It can be determined from the data that maze-learning in rats depends on at least two sources of sensory stimulation, one of which is kinesthesia, but which of the remaining sources must also be employed is not determinable.

Source: LSAT

Kinesthesia hasn't been shown to be irrelevant to maze-learning.

-->

Kinesthesia is sufficient for maze learning.

What's the problem? Something not being irrelevant doesn't make it sufficient. If you have a buddy who can never wake up on time, what is sufficient for his waking up? 1. His alarm clock goes off. 2. He isn't hungover or exhausted from playing video games all night. 3. He doesn't just ignore the alarm clock. We'd say his alarm clock actually going off is not irrelevant to his getting up--it may be necessary--but that doesn't make it sufficient. All sorts of other things have to happen for him to wake up.

The same thing is true here. (B) captures the difference between kinesthesia being possibly necessary versus it's being sufficient. Even if the mice need it for maze-learning, maybe they need something else, too. The experiment doesn't give us enough to know what else is required.

(A) is irrelevant.
(C) is also irrelevant. We aren't concerned with how it takes place.
(D) is wrong because it's actually not determined by the study that rats can maze-learn by kinesthesia alone. And the rest of (D) is irrelevant.
(E) is tricky. It takes the lack of knowledge that kinesthesia is sufficient and turns it into knowledge that kinesthesia is insufficient. We don't know whether kinesthesia is sufficient or not. (E) tells us that we do.
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
Manager
Joined: 04 Feb 2016
Posts: 64
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT 1: 650 Q48 V32
GPA: 4
WE: Sales (Computer Software)
Re: In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2018, 06:52
Can someone explain the difference between B and E?

Tx, Srinjoy.
_________________
GMAT1 650 Q48 V32.
Manager
Joined: 30 Nov 2016
Posts: 103
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jul 2018, 05:02
srinjoy1990 wrote:
Can someone explain the difference between B and E?

Tx, Srinjoy.

E goes against the premise that kinesthesia, the sensation of bodily movement, is sufficient for maze-learning. the data doesn't suggest that additional sources are required it tells us that we can't rule out the possibility that kinesthesia combibed with such sources yields the results obtained.
VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1026
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jul 2018, 07:26
srinjoy1990 wrote:
Can someone explain the difference between B and E?

Tx, Srinjoy.

Choice B is the correct answer as it shows that kinesthesia is not sufficient for maze learning. Maze learning requires some other sense with kinesthesia.

E It can be determined from the data that maze-learning in rats depends on at least two sources of sensory stimulation, one of which is kinesthesia, but which of the remaining sources must also be employed is not determinable.
E is very tricky statement. This statement mentions that maze learning depends on at least two senses. This takes it for granted that there are more than two sensory inputs. Thus it changes the scope of the argument.
_________________
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 5179
Re: In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Aug 2019, 20:15
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
Re: In a learning experiment a researcher ran rats through   [#permalink] 05 Aug 2019, 20:15
Display posts from previous: Sort by