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

It is currently 21 Oct 2018, 01:12

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Director
Director
User avatar
B
Status: I don't stop when I'm Tired,I stop when I'm done
Joined: 11 May 2014
Posts: 542
Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Finance, Leadership
GPA: 2.81
WE: Business Development (Real Estate)
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jul 2016, 00:30
10
47
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

67% (01:25) correct 33% (01:30) wrong based on 2389 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers’ reasoning?

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.

OG Verbal 2017 New Question(Book Question: 180)

_________________

Md. Abdur Rakib

Please Press +1 Kudos,If it helps
Sentence Correction-Collection of Ron Purewal's "elliptical construction/analogies" for SC Challenges

Most Helpful Expert Reply
Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3031
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Nov 2016, 12:36
6
1
1988achilles wrote:
AbdurRakib wrote:
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers’ reasoning?

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.

OG Verbal 2017 New Question(Book Question: 180)


Hi,

I cannot understand, why option B is the answer. The argument has cause and effect relation in the conclusion, which says that the prior expectation of supernatural activity made them experience unusual activity. Hence,

Prior expectation-> unusual experience.
Hence if we prove that something else lead to unusual experience, we can weaken the argument. Option C, says each participant had prior belief of supernatural experience. Hence it could be prior belief of supernatural experience that could cause such experience not the expectation of supernatural activity.

Please, help why my reasoning is flawed and why B is OA.

Regards


Option C does not state that the first group had significantly more people who had prior belief in supernatural. Rather this option indicates that both the groups were diverse (each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs) and hence the result was not biased because of some particular trait in a particular group. Thus option C in a way strengthens the argument.

Option B. If the volunteers in the first group did not believe the statement that the theater was haunted, then they would not have had any expectation for supernatural experiences. Thus their report ( significantly more unusual experiences ) was not caused by their expectation, but by something else. This option is therefore a weakener.
General Discussion
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 29 May 2016
Posts: 106
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Jul 2016, 22:16
2
1
P1 :- two groups
P2 :- first group has been told theater is haunted
P2 :- second been told that it was under renovation
P3 :- First half reported significantly more unusual

conclusion :- it is because of prior expectations.
Basically author is assuming they actually believe the statement
B is just opposite as it says they don't believe the author
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2016
Posts: 12
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Sep 2016, 04:02
The important part of the conclusion is reports of ... generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
Irrelevant, this does not support conclusion as the second half were not expecting the theater to be haunted
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
Possible candidate, assumption is that first group would assume that it was actually haunted
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
Plausible but not relevant to conclusion
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
Irrelevant
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.
Irrelevant

This leaves only B as the answer
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 12 Aug 2015
Posts: 119
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.38
Reviews Badge
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Nov 2016, 22:31
AbdurRakib wrote:
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers’ reasoning?

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.

OG Verbal 2017 New Question(Book Question: 180)


Hi,

I cannot understand, why option B is the answer. The argument has cause and effect relation in the conclusion, which says that the prior expectation of supernatural activity made them experience unusual activity. Hence,

Prior expectation-> unusual experience.
Hence if we prove that something else lead to unusual experience, we can weaken the argument. Option C, says each participant had prior belief of supernatural experience. Hence it could be prior belief of supernatural experience that could cause such experience not the expectation of supernatural activity.

Please, help why my reasoning is flawed and why B is OA.

Regards
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 11 Sep 2016
Posts: 5
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2016, 20:36
sayantanc2k wrote:
1988achilles wrote:
AbdurRakib wrote:
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers’ reasoning?

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.

OG Verbal 2017 New Question(Book Question: 180)


Hi,

I cannot understand, why option B is the answer. The argument has cause and effect relation in the conclusion, which says that the prior expectation of supernatural activity made them experience unusual activity. Hence,

Prior expectation-> unusual experience.
Hence if we prove that something else lead to unusual experience, we can weaken the argument. Option C, says each participant had prior belief of supernatural experience. Hence it could be prior belief of supernatural experience that could cause such experience not the expectation of supernatural activity.

Please, help why my reasoning is flawed and why B is OA.

Regards


Option C does not state that the first group had significantly more people who had prior belief in supernatural. Rather this option indicates that both the groups were diverse (each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs) and hence the result was not biased because of some particular trait in a particular group. Thus option C in a way strengthens the argument.

Option B. If the volunteers in the first group did not believe the statement that the theater was haunted, then they would not have had any expectation for supernatural experiences. Thus their report ( significantly more unusual experiences ) was not caused by their expectation, but by something else. This option is therefore a weakener.


Option D states that the unusual experiences had a cause that didn't involve supernatural. So, if the reports themselves don't contain supernatural events, then how the researcher could conclude anything? Doesn't option D undermine the conclusion. I totally understand why B is the option, but I am confused about D.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Nov 2014
Posts: 48
Location: India
Schools: ISB '18
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.7
Premium Member
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Dec 2016, 00:47
abhishekaqsais wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
1988achilles wrote:
[quote="AbdurRakib"]In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers’ reasoning?

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.

OG Verbal 2017 New Question(Book Question: 180)


Hi,

I cannot understand, why option B is the answer. The argument has cause and effect relation in the conclusion, which says that the prior expectation of supernatural activity made them experience unusual activity. Hence,

Prior expectation-> unusual experience.
Hence if we prove that something else lead to unusual experience, we can weaken the argument. Option C, says each participant had prior belief of supernatural experience. Hence it could be prior belief of supernatural experience that could cause such experience not the expectation of supernatural activity.

Please, help why my reasoning is flawed and why B is OA.

Regards


Option C does not state that the first group had significantly more people who had prior belief in supernatural. Rather this option indicates that both the groups were diverse (each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs) and hence the result was not biased because of some particular trait in a particular group. Thus option C in a way strengthens the argument.

Option B. If the volunteers in the first group did not believe the statement that the theater was haunted, then they would not have had any expectation for supernatural experiences. Thus their report ( significantly more unusual experiences ) was not caused by their expectation, but by something else. This option is therefore a weakener.


Option D states that the unusual experiences had a cause that didn't involve supernatural. So, if the reports themselves don't contain supernatural events, then how the researcher could conclude anything? Doesn't option D undermine the conclusion. I totally understand why B is the option, but I am confused about D.[/quote]
Hi,

The unstated assumption is that the first group of people believed in researchers story before entering the area. You need to find something that refutes this assumption. Option D just states that the causes may not be supernatural. These are the author's words and the participants may not feel the same. Therfore option D is out of scope for the current argument
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Aug 2015
Posts: 86
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jan 2017, 00:18
Hi, How can we rule out option D? My thinking was that if there was indeed some experience that was not supernatural then it undermines the conclusion that prior expectations of such experiences was the cause?
Thanks
Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3031
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jan 2017, 08:22
2
rakaisraka wrote:
Hi, How can we rule out option D? My thinking was that if there was indeed some experience that was not supernatural then it undermines the conclusion that prior expectations of such experiences was the cause?
Thanks


It is not stated that only the volunteers of the second group understood that there was some natural reason for the experience. Therefore the reason for more unusual experiences for the first group cannot be attributed to the fact that the second group, but not the first group, understood that actual reasons were not supernatural. Thus the reason for more unusual experience from the first group can still be attributed to the fact that the first group expected something unusual. Hence option D does not weaken the conclusion.

(Note: As long as it is not given that the volunteers were aware of the natural reason for the experience, it is not important whether the experiences were actually because of supernatural reason or natural reason.)
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Feb 2016
Posts: 72
Location: India
Concentration: Technology
Schools: AGSM '20 (A)
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 4
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 May 2017, 10:39
Hi sayantanc2k,

Can you take an example to help understand this logic for option D ?

sayantanc2k wrote:
rakaisraka wrote:
Hi, How can we rule out option D? My thinking was that if there was indeed some experience that was not supernatural then it undermines the conclusion that prior expectations of such experiences was the cause?
Thanks


It is not stated that only the volunteers of the second group understood that there was some natural reason for the experience. Therefore the reason for more unusual experiences for the first group cannot be attributed to the fact that the second group, but not the first group, understood that actual reasons were not supernatural. Thus the reason for more unusual experience from the first group can still be attributed to the fact that the first group expected something unusual. Hence option D does not weaken the conclusion.

(Note: As long as it is not given that the volunteers were aware of the natural reason for the experience, it is not important whether the experiences were actually because of supernatural reason or natural reason.)
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Status: Final Call! Will Achieve Target ANyHow This Tym! :)
Joined: 05 Jan 2016
Posts: 82
Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q49 V25
GPA: 3.8
Reviews Badge
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Aug 2017, 22:17
AbdurRakib wrote:
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers’ reasoning?

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.

OG Verbal 2017 New Question(Book Question: 180)


D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.

My understanding for option D.
This option is simply stating that CAUSE for each unusual experience reported by the volunteers(both the first and second half) did not involve the supernatural. But are the volunteers themselves aware of the cause?? :?: :?: The volunteers are simply reporting the unusual experience and that too the first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. These volunteers specifically the first half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted, so they may believe that the cause of each unusual experience that they are experiencing was due to supernatural. This in turn supports the conclusion that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Can someone explain option D in more detail? VeritasPrepKarishma, can you please review my explanation?
_________________

Regards,
Varun


Trying my best..... will succeed definitely! :)

The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long.
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful. :)

Do Check OG 2017 SC Solutions - http://gmatwithcj.com/solutions-gmat-official-guide-2017-sentence-correction-questions/

Mannheim Thread Master
User avatar
S
Status: It's now or never
Joined: 10 Feb 2017
Posts: 200
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q40 V39
GPA: 3
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2017, 10:26
B is correct - If none of the volunteers believed the researchers' claim that the theater was haunted, then the implicit assumption that several of those volunteers expected supernatural experiences in the theater is flawed, and so the inference that their prior expectations probably account for their reports of supernatural experiences is flawed.
_________________

2017-2018 MBA Deadlines

Threadmaster for B-school Discussions
Class of 2019: Mannheim Business School
Class 0f 2020: HHL Leipzig

BSchool Forum Moderator
User avatar
D
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 1161
Location: India
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2017, 11:23
1
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers’ reasoning?

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural. -The second group weren't told that the place was haunted. Out of scope.
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie. -Correct. If all the members of the first group thought that what they were told is a lie, then they didn't have any expectation.
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences. -This is a strengthener.
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural. -We are not worried about the cause.
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted. -The argument is about the volunteers.
_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Long And A Fruitful Journey - V21 to V41; If I can, So Can You!!


Preparing for RC my way


My study resources:
1. Useful Formulae, Concepts and Tricks-Quant
2. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
3. LSAT RC compilation
4. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
5. QOTD RC (Carcass)
6. Challange OG RC
7. GMAT Prep Challenge RC

BSchool Forum Moderator
avatar
P
Joined: 05 Jul 2017
Posts: 489
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
GPA: 4
CAT Tests
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Sep 2017, 23:23
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 144
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
Premium Member Reviews Badge
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Sep 2017, 01:50
1
pikolo2510 wrote:
Hello experts,

Can you explain why option D is incorrect?


The point of the passage is not what actually caused the unusual events, even if there have been any, but whether the inference drawn from those events, as felt by the representative of the experiments, can be attributed to the prior experience of such knowledge.

Cheers !!
_________________

If you find my posts/replies helpful, please take a moment to click on the "kudos" icon.

Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2086
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2017, 12:50
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Type - weaken
Boil it down - reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural. - Incorrect - second group was not told about the haunting
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie. - Correct - If this is true , then people of first group did not have prior expectations
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences. - Incorrect - it tells that groups there was variations even in the people in the two groups
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural. - Irrelevant - cause is not relevant
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted. - Irrelevant

Answer B
_________________

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
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 473
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Oct 2017, 07:13
1
AnubhavK wrote:
B is correct - If none of the volunteers believed the researchers' claim that the theater was haunted, then the implicit assumption that several of those volunteers expected supernatural experiences in the theater is flawed, and so the inference that their prior expectations probably account for their reports of supernatural experiences is flawed.



Wherever i see your comment => reminds me of copy paste from Verbal review 8-)
_________________

Give Kudos for correct answer and/or if you like the solution.

Target Test Prep Representative
User avatar
P
Status: Founder & CEO
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Posts: 3896
Location: United States (CA)
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Dec 2017, 10:54
5
AbdurRakib wrote:
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers’ reasoning?

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.


The argument in this question is worded in a way such that what is being said is not entirely clear, in that the researchers discuss “reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities,” while what the volunteers reported were simply “unusual experiences.” This wording could be taken as indicating that the “unusual experiences” that the volunteers had were somehow related to the supernatural. On the other hand, it could be that the difference between the wording used to describe what the volunteers experienced and the wording used in stating the researchers’ conclusion is a sign of a weakness in the argument. So, this difference is worth noting as we go to the answer choices to find one that weakens the argument.

A. None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.

Since the volunteers in the second half are not the ones who were told that the theater was haunted, the fact that none of them believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural is in line with the reasoning of the argument and, therefore, does not weaken the conclusion.

B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.

Since the researchers concluded that reports of supernatural experiences result from prior expectations of such experiences, the researchers must have assumed that their having told volunteers that the theater was haunted resulted in those volunteers’ expecting to have supernatural experiences.

This choice attacks that assumption, because, if the volunteers who were told that the theater was haunted believed that the researchers were lying, then the researchers’ saying that the theater was haunted would not have caused the volunteers to expect to have supernatural experiences.

What this choice says is in line with the wording of the passage, in that the passage says that the researchers came to a conclusion about supernatural experiences, while the volunteers reported experiences that were merely “unusual.” In other words, even the passage provided some indication that the researchers may have made an unwarranted assumption in arriving at their conclusion.

If the assumption that the volunteers in the first group expected to have supernatural experiences is incorrect, then the entire argument falls apart. Thus, this choice wrecks the argument.

C. Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.

This choice could be tempting, because it says something about the volunteers’ beliefs in the type of experiences that the argument is about. However, once you look closely at what this choice actually says, you see that all it conveys is that within each group the people varied in the degree to which they believed in supernatural experiences. In other words, this choices neither differentiates the two groups nor gives us any reason to believe that the volunteers in the first half did not expect to have supernatural experiences. So, this choice does not weaken the argument.

D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.

This choice is a trap, because it could be perceived as undermining the conclusion though it does not actually do so.

Since the conclusion of the argument is about people reporting supernatural experiences, information indicating that those people did not in fact have supernatural experiences might seem to undermine the conclusion.

Notice, however, that the reasoning of the argument involves people’s “expectations” and “unusual experiences” that people “reported.” The experiences do not have to actually be supernatural experiences for people to report them. They could report the experiences, and they could even believe that the experiences were supernatural, even if the experiences were not supernatural. So, this choice does not affect the argument at all.

E. The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.

The argument is based on what the volunteers believed, not what the researchers believed. So, this choice does not affect the argument.

The correct answer is B.
_________________

Scott Woodbury-Stewart
Founder and CEO

GMAT Quant Self-Study Course
500+ lessons 3000+ practice problems 800+ HD solutions

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 11 Sep 2017
Posts: 28
CAT Tests
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Aug 2018, 07:41
GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo
ConcIusion: Author says that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally results from prior expectations of such events.

So If i break the causalty indicating that their could be some other event/factor that could have caused reports of encounters of ghosts and supernatural entities. Option B rightly says so by pointing out that if students of second group did not believe in the researchers` words then they will not have expectations of such events.

But for option D: It says that Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.

Now if the unusual experiences were caused by expectations of such events then these expectations involve have supernatural entities and ghosts (as rightly said in the question stem-such events) Hence when option d says that the cause did not involve supernatural. Then apart from saying that the people did not have any supernatural experience inside it also says that the expectations of such events were not their. And one of the sources of these expectations has to be supernatural. Hence Option D weakens the argument.

Pl correct me.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2042
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Sep 2018, 15:45
4
hassu13 wrote:
GMATNinja,GMATNinjaTwo
ConcIusion: Author says that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally results from prior expectations of such events.

So If i break the causalty indicating that their could be some other event/factor that could have caused reports of encounters of ghosts and supernatural entities. Option B rightly says so by pointing out that if students of second group did not believe in the researchers` words then they will not have expectations of such events.

But for option D: It says that Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.

Now if the unusual experiences were caused by expectations of such events then these expectations involve have supernatural entities and ghosts (as rightly said in the question stem-such events) Hence when option d says that the cause did not involve supernatural. Then apart from saying that the people did not have any supernatural experience inside it also says that the expectations of such events were not their. And one of the sources of these expectations has to be supernatural. Hence Option D weakens the argument.

Pl correct me.

This question is spooky, kind of like Tom Hanks in a really creepy Halloween costume. And while I'm thinking about Tom Hanks, here's a fun fact: GMAT Club founder bb may or may not actually be completely identical in physical appearance to Tom Hanks, at least when he isn't wearing a rain coat in a blurry picture. ;)

Anyway, let's break this down:
Quote:
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

You've correctly identified the conclusion: reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Let's take a closer look at the logic.

  • Volunteers walked through a dark, abandoned theater.
  • Half of them (we'll call them Group 1) were previously told that the theater was haunted.
  • Half of them (we'll call them Group 2) were previously told that the theater was under renovation.
  • Group 1 reported significantly more unusual experiences than Group 2.
  • Therefore, reports of these unusual experiences generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.

Here's the logic spelled out with an example of a generic volunteer. Let's call him Tom:

  • Tom expects an unusual experience.
  • Tom has an experience.
  • Because he was expecting that experience to be unusual, Tom reports that experience to be unusual.

We're looking for anything that would weaken the link between Tom's expectation and Tom's report.

Quote:
D. Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.

What's missing from this supposed weakener? Well, we have reports of an unusual experience, but this answer choice says nothing about the volunteers' expectations. If we can't weaken the link between expectations and reports, then we're not weakening the researchers' logical conclusion.

Let's spell this out once more with our generic volunteer, Tom:

  • Tom expects an unusual experience.
  • Tom has an experience.
  • That experience has nothing to do with supernatural causes or other unusual happenings. It is caused by a spooky soundtrack that the researchers played from hidden speakers throughout the theater.
  • Because he was expecting that experience to be unusual, Tom reports that experience to be unusual.

The argument is absolutely undisturbed by this new information! Now we know that Tom is a sucker, but the fact remains that Tom expected an unusual experience, so Tom reported an unusual experience. The fact that this experience was caused by some other factor doesn't change what's going on in Tom's head. And this conclusion is entirely focused on the link between what volunteers expect and what they report.

Compare this to choice (B):
Quote:
B. All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers’ statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.

Unlike (D), choice (B) goes straight for the jugular by contradicting what the volunteers expect before going into the theater.

This is why (D) is not as good of an answer choice as (B).

I hope this helps!

Image
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | Instagram | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

GMAT Club Bot
Re: In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband &nbs [#permalink] 01 Sep 2018, 15:45

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 24 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, aband

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.