Last visit was: 23 Jun 2025, 04:59 It is currently 23 Jun 2025, 04:59
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
User avatar
avigutman
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 09 Jun 2025
Posts: 1,295
Own Kudos:
1,896
 [1]
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,295
Kudos: 1,896
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,304
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,304
Kudos: 275
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
avigutman
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 09 Jun 2025
Posts: 1,295
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,295
Kudos: 1,896
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,304
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,304
Kudos: 275
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi avigutman - I see what you are saying. So, if interpretation # 2 was indeed true , this sentence below would ALSO be accurate (which it is NOT)
Quote:
I saw students in the school's parents on Sunday.


Because per interpretation #2, the sentence would thus read

I saw parents (of students in the school ) on Sunday

But we know the below sentence IS WRONG
Quote:
I saw students in the school's parents on Sunday.

So my take-away is :

In the construction X's Y : X is the noun DIRECTLY connecting to the appostrophe - Y
User avatar
avigutman
Joined: 17 Jul 2019
Last visit: 09 Jun 2025
Posts: 1,295
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 66
Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V45
GMAT 2: 780 Q50 V47
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V45
Posts: 1,295
Kudos: 1,896
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2
So my take-away is :

In the construction X's Y : X is the noun DIRECTLY connecting to the appostrophe - Y

That is a good takeaway jabhatta2!
avatar
Trancv
Joined: 14 Dec 2021
Last visit: 12 Apr 2022
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Given Kudos: 71
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q46 V34
GPA: 3.76
WE:Analyst (Retail Banking)
GMAT 1: 650 Q46 V34
Posts: 5
Kudos: 1
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I chose E in the OG and it was wrong.
I think the catch is in the word "THE".

E would be perfect if THE were removed. For example, we say "What job do you do?", not "What the job do you do?"

to investigate what effects changes in working conditions would have on workers' performance
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 21 Jun 2025
Posts: 5,132
Own Kudos:
4,725
 [1]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,132
Kudos: 4,725
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Trancv
I chose E in the OG and it was wrong.
I think the catch is in the word "THE".

E would be perfect if THE were removed. For example, we say "What job do you do?", not "What the job do you do?"

to investigate what effects changes in working conditions would have on workers' performance

Hello Trancv,

We hope this finds you well.

We are making this post to inform you that your reasoning is largely correct. The inclusion of "the" alongside "what" leads to an incoherent meaning; the removal of either "what" or "the" would resolve this issue.

One other strike against E is the use of the infinitive verb form ("to + base form of verb" - "to + investigate" in this sentence); the use of the present participle ("verb+ing" - "investigating", as seen in the correct option) is more appropriate, as it better conveys the intended meaning - that the experiments investigated the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
Will2020
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 24 Jan 2017
Last visit: 04 Mar 2022
Posts: 139
Own Kudos:
49
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,120
Location: Brazil
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Strategy
GPA: 3.2
WE:Consulting (Healthcare/Pharmaceuticals)
Products:
Posts: 139
Kudos: 49
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
leeye84
In the mid-1920’s the Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance.

(A) that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance

(B) investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance

(C) for investigating what are the effects in workers’ performance that changes in working conditions would cause

(D) that investigated changes in working conditions’ effects on workers’ performance

(E) to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance

Source : GMATPrep Default Exam Pack

Scientific American Resource Library: Readings in Psychology, Volume 2

The name comes from the Western Electric Company's Hawthorne Works in Chicago. In the 1920's the plant was the scene of an intensive series of experiments designed to determine what effect various changes in working conditions would have on the performance of female workers.

Hi ryanstarr! I know that other tutors have tackled this question, but I would like you take on it, so that I can clarify some doubts. Can you help? Thank you! :please:
User avatar
gmatimothy
Joined: 18 Apr 2022
Last visit: 19 Dec 2022
Posts: 111
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 704
Location: United States
Posts: 111
Kudos: 9
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
leeye84
In the mid-1920’s the Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance.

(A) that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance

(B) investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance

Best answer - "investigating" modifies "experiments." "Effects" follow right after "investigating," which logically makes sense.

(C) for investigating what are the effects in workers’ performance that changes in working conditions would cause

(D) that investigated changes in working conditions’ effects on workers’ performance

(E) to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance

"What the effects" = unidiomatic

Generally, "what" is redundant / unnecessary.

"to investigate what the effects" is inferior to "to investigate the effects," which is basically the form that (B) has

Source : GMATPrep Default Exam Pack

Scientific American Resource Library: Readings in Psychology, Volume 2

The name comes from the Western Electric Company's Hawthorne Works in Chicago. In the 1920's the plant was the scene of an intensive series of experiments designed to determine what effect various changes in working conditions would have on the performance of female workers.
User avatar
aryamaagarwal
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 20 Jan 2022
Last visit: 30 Dec 2023
Posts: 54
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 60
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36
GPA: 4
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V36
Posts: 54
Kudos: 7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mikemcgarry
nahid78
I can't even understand what is going on here...

In the mid-1920’s the Clyde Fan Factory of the Bosch Manufacturing Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance.

A. that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance

B. investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance

C. for investigating what are the effects in workers’ performance that changes in working conditions would cause

D. that investigated changes in working conditions’ effects on workers’ performance

E. to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance


As far as I have learnt the rules...
In A "That" modifies experiments, which can not investigate.
B) again investigating modifies experiments
C) For is wrong usage, and effects in workers’ performance that changes, I think verb changes should take Subject effects, I don't understand how can this "that" does not modify performance but effects.
D) same as A
E) I rearrange it as " to investigate the effects that changes in changes in working conditions would have....

I am totally confused now after seeing the OA. Can anyone make this rules or strategy clear to me....

mikemcgarry, i hope you won't mind if i continue to tag you. I am sorry if I bother you, but i think you are best man to whom I can ask help.
Dear nahid78,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

My friend, I have some bad news for you. It is absolutely impossible to arrive at GMAT SC mastery simply by learning some mythical "complete" set of rules. Yes, there are some rules and some patterns that are important to know, but everything you need to know can't be summarized by rules alone. Apart from rules, you also need to develop instincts for sophisticated writing, and the only way to do this is to develop a habit of reading. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

Students labor under the misconception that the GMAT SC is just a test of grammar. In fact, grammar and logic and rhetoric are all equally important. There are some rules for grammar and logic, although there are elements of both that go beyond rules. Rhetoric is much more pattern-based and feeling-based--it's harder to state many "rules" for good rhetoric. Rules are helpful only up to a certain level, and beyond that, searching for the "right" rule obscures what's important.

OK, let's look at this problem:
In the mid-1920’s the Clyde Fan Factory of the Bosch Manufacturing Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance.

A. that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance

First of all, one thing that is odd is the hypothetical statement, "would investigate." This is not the form we would use for reporting a simple historical fact. Also, the construction "as to their effects" sounds particularly stilted and excessively formal. The GMAT SC prefers formal language, but that's a little over-the-top.

B. investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance
simple, clear--a promising answer

C. for investigating what are the effects in workers’ performance that changes in working conditions would cause
The construction "experiments for investigating" is not outright wrong, but a odd. After all, all experiments are "for investigating" something. What's really awkward about this is the wordy indirect backward organization. Notice that it puts the effects at the beginning and the cause at the end: the logical order is to flow from cause to effect. It's not automatically wrong to put the effects first, but it would have to be done skillfully. Here, the effect is very awkward and indirect---it's a rhetorical train wreck!

D. that investigated changes in working conditions’ effects on workers’ performance
Not bad, but it's a little awkward because it's so compressed. Concision is a good thing, rhetorically: saying something in a long wordy way is bad, but it's also a problem to be too short. Notice that after the verb "investigated," there is a pile-up of nouns with no verb. There's cause-and-effect action taking place there, but no verb for that action. It's not "wrong," but awkward---not the way a skilled writer would communicate the idea.

E. to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance
This opens with an infinitive of purpose. This one would be pretty good, except for the hypothetical verb "would have." This sentence is not about something hypothetical: it's about a real historical situation, in which real conditions had effects on real workers. As in (A), the hypothetical verb tense doesn't reflect the historical reality.

The only possible answer would be (B). This is a hard question!

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
I can't understand why E is wrong. B also has "would have", so why did say that it is wrong in E?
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 21 Jun 2025
Posts: 5,132
Own Kudos:
4,725
 [1]
Given Kudos: 38
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,132
Kudos: 4,725
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
aryamaagarwal
mikemcgarry
nahid78
I can't even understand what is going on here...

In the mid-1920’s the Clyde Fan Factory of the Bosch Manufacturing Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance.

A. that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance

B. investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance

C. for investigating what are the effects in workers’ performance that changes in working conditions would cause

D. that investigated changes in working conditions’ effects on workers’ performance

E. to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance


As far as I have learnt the rules...
In A "That" modifies experiments, which can not investigate.
B) again investigating modifies experiments
C) For is wrong usage, and effects in workers’ performance that changes, I think verb changes should take Subject effects, I don't understand how can this "that" does not modify performance but effects.
D) same as A
E) I rearrange it as " to investigate the effects that changes in changes in working conditions would have....

I am totally confused now after seeing the OA. Can anyone make this rules or strategy clear to me....

mikemcgarry, i hope you won't mind if i continue to tag you. I am sorry if I bother you, but i think you are best man to whom I can ask help.
Dear nahid78,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

My friend, I have some bad news for you. It is absolutely impossible to arrive at GMAT SC mastery simply by learning some mythical "complete" set of rules. Yes, there are some rules and some patterns that are important to know, but everything you need to know can't be summarized by rules alone. Apart from rules, you also need to develop instincts for sophisticated writing, and the only way to do this is to develop a habit of reading. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

Students labor under the misconception that the GMAT SC is just a test of grammar. In fact, grammar and logic and rhetoric are all equally important. There are some rules for grammar and logic, although there are elements of both that go beyond rules. Rhetoric is much more pattern-based and feeling-based--it's harder to state many "rules" for good rhetoric. Rules are helpful only up to a certain level, and beyond that, searching for the "right" rule obscures what's important.

OK, let's look at this problem:
In the mid-1920’s the Clyde Fan Factory of the Bosch Manufacturing Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance.

A. that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance

First of all, one thing that is odd is the hypothetical statement, "would investigate." This is not the form we would use for reporting a simple historical fact. Also, the construction "as to their effects" sounds particularly stilted and excessively formal. The GMAT SC prefers formal language, but that's a little over-the-top.

B. investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance
simple, clear--a promising answer

C. for investigating what are the effects in workers’ performance that changes in working conditions would cause
The construction "experiments for investigating" is not outright wrong, but a odd. After all, all experiments are "for investigating" something. What's really awkward about this is the wordy indirect backward organization. Notice that it puts the effects at the beginning and the cause at the end: the logical order is to flow from cause to effect. It's not automatically wrong to put the effects first, but it would have to be done skillfully. Here, the effect is very awkward and indirect---it's a rhetorical train wreck!

D. that investigated changes in working conditions’ effects on workers’ performance
Not bad, but it's a little awkward because it's so compressed. Concision is a good thing, rhetorically: saying something in a long wordy way is bad, but it's also a problem to be too short. Notice that after the verb "investigated," there is a pile-up of nouns with no verb. There's cause-and-effect action taking place there, but no verb for that action. It's not "wrong," but awkward---not the way a skilled writer would communicate the idea.

E. to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance
This opens with an infinitive of purpose. This one would be pretty good, except for the hypothetical verb "would have." This sentence is not about something hypothetical: it's about a real historical situation, in which real conditions had effects on real workers. As in (A), the hypothetical verb tense doesn't reflect the historical reality.

The only possible answer would be (B). This is a hard question!

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
I can't understand why E is wrong. B also has "would have", so why did say that it is wrong in E?

Hello aryamaagarwal,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, Option E is not really incorrect, as such; it is just less concise and less direct than Option B, making it the inferior answer choice.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team
User avatar
Anshul1223333
Joined: 04 Oct 2017
Last visit: 29 Nov 2022
Posts: 69
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 36
Posts: 69
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Is this an official question?

in B] experiments can not do the action of investigating!
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,476
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,431
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,476
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Anshul1223333
Is this an official question?

in B] experiments can not do the action of investigating!
It's an official question, and not a very good one.

More than one of its choices express that sketchy meaning, and meanwhile, the use of "would" in (B) doesn't make sense, since it results in the sentence's communicating the somewhat illogical meaning that the point was to see what the effects would be rather than what they are.

Meanwhile, the (D) version is a perfectly good sentence.
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 01 Jun 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,049
 [1]
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,049
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Anshul1223333
Is this an official question?

in B] experiments can not do the action of investigating!
Hi Anshul1223333,

Such issues can be a little frustrating. We can't generalise, but what we see in option B is acceptable. Of course, we want to make sure that we look at the other options as well, but the GMAT isn't doing anything wrong here.

MartyTargetTestPrep
It's an official question, and not a very good one.

More than one of its choices express that sketchy meaning, and meanwhile, the use of "would" in (B) doesn't make sense, since it results in the sentence's communicating the somewhat illogical meaning that the point was to see what the effects would be rather than what they are.

Meanwhile, the (D) version is a perfectly good sentence.
I don't agree with the view that this isn't a good question because the meaning that option B conveys is "sketchy". I respect your opinion, but I can't see how we can argue that pairing experiments with investigating is not okay.
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,431
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,476
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AjiteshArun
MartyTargetTestPrep
It's an official question, and not a very good one.

More than one of its choices express that sketchy meaning, and meanwhile, the use of "would" in (B) doesn't make sense, since it results in the sentence's communicating the somewhat illogical meaning that the point was to see what the effects would be rather than what they are.

Meanwhile, the (D) version is a perfectly good sentence.
I don't agree with the view that this isn't a good question because the meaning that option B conveys is "sketchy". I respect your opinion, but I can't see how we can argue that pairing experiments with investigating is not okay.
OK, I'm not totally sold on the idea that "experiments investigating" is incorrect, but I still find the (D) version a fine version of the sentence, possibly a better version than the (B) version.

The fact that there are two quite acceptable versions of the sentence is the main reason I find this question one of the busted official questions.
User avatar
himanshu0123
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Last visit: 20 Mar 2023
Posts: 191
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 101
Posts: 191
Kudos: 5
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(B) investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers??? performance

can experiments do the action of 'investigating' unable to relate to ing verbal rule here? How to deal with such exceptions

(E) to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers??? performance

is there anything wrong in using 'to investigate'

is 'what the effects changes in working...'' an awkward phrase. are there any similar words like 'what' which make things awkward?
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 23 Jun 2025
Posts: 7,332
Own Kudos:
68,311
 [3]
Given Kudos: 1,950
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,332
Kudos: 68,311
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
himanshu0123
(B) investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers??? performance

can experiments do the action of 'investigating' unable to relate to ing verbal rule here? How to deal with such exceptions

{...}
We attempted to address this point here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/in-the-mid-1 ... l#p2520529

Quote:
(E) to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers??? performance

is there anything wrong in using 'to investigate'

is 'what the effects changes in working...'' an awkward phrase. are there any similar words like 'what' which make things awkward?
It would be nice if we could look at (E) and say, "This sentence is WRONG because of X and Y." But unfortunately, that's just not the case. There's nothing terribly wrong with (E), and that's why we're stuck with the unsatisfying process of comparing (B) and (E) and making little votes for and against each option (as we did in our original explanation).

Is "to investigate" wrong? Is the use of "what" wrong? Maybe not. But does (E) have any advantages over (B)? Is (E) just a more confusing and long-winded way of saying the same thing? If so, go with (B).

Just be careful: it's not a great idea to try to invent rules regarding infinitives and the word "what" that we can mindlessly apply to other questions. That's just not how this test works, unfortunately.

I hope that helps a bit!
User avatar
mansianand1234
Joined: 24 Jul 2017
Last visit: 02 Dec 2022
Posts: 22
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 22
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
in E] can we say that 'to investigate' is an adverbial modifer and thus 'company' is the modified entity doing the action of investigating.


a side question: can two modifiers side by side joined by a comma modify a succeeding noun as shown in the example below.

please throw some light on this aspect.

''In her 1851 series, later becoming the famous model, she wrote a thriller''
User avatar
kittle
Joined: 11 May 2021
Last visit: 22 Jun 2025
Posts: 318
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 606
Products:
Posts: 318
Kudos: 158
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Very well said Mike!

mikemcgarry
nahid78
I can't even understand what is going on here...

In the mid-1920’s the Clyde Fan Factory of the Bosch Manufacturing Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance.

A. that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance

B. investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance

C. for investigating what are the effects in workers’ performance that changes in working conditions would cause

D. that investigated changes in working conditions’ effects on workers’ performance

E. to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance


As far as I have learnt the rules...
In A "That" modifies experiments, which can not investigate.
B) again investigating modifies experiments
C) For is wrong usage, and effects in workers’ performance that changes, I think verb changes should take Subject effects, I don't understand how can this "that" does not modify performance but effects.
D) same as A
E) I rearrange it as " to investigate the effects that changes in changes in working conditions would have....

I am totally confused now after seeing the OA. Can anyone make this rules or strategy clear to me....

mikemcgarry, i hope you won't mind if i continue to tag you. I am sorry if I bother you, but i think you are best man to whom I can ask help.
Dear nahid78,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

My friend, I have some bad news for you. It is absolutely impossible to arrive at GMAT SC mastery simply by learning some mythical "complete" set of rules. Yes, there are some rules and some patterns that are important to know, but everything you need to know can't be summarized by rules alone. Apart from rules, you also need to develop instincts for sophisticated writing, and the only way to do this is to develop a habit of reading. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

Students labor under the misconception that the GMAT SC is just a test of grammar. In fact, grammar and logic and rhetoric are all equally important. There are some rules for grammar and logic, although there are elements of both that go beyond rules. Rhetoric is much more pattern-based and feeling-based--it's harder to state many "rules" for good rhetoric. Rules are helpful only up to a certain level, and beyond that, searching for the "right" rule obscures what's important.

OK, let's look at this problem:
In the mid-1920’s the Clyde Fan Factory of the Bosch Manufacturing Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance.

A. that would investigate changes in working conditions as to their effects on workers’ performance

First of all, one thing that is odd is the hypothetical statement, "would investigate." This is not the form we would use for reporting a simple historical fact. Also, the construction "as to their effects" sounds particularly stilted and excessively formal. The GMAT SC prefers formal language, but that's a little over-the-top.

B. investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance
simple, clear--a promising answer

C. for investigating what are the effects in workers’ performance that changes in working conditions would cause
The construction "experiments for investigating" is not outright wrong, but a odd. After all, all experiments are "for investigating" something. What's really awkward about this is the wordy indirect backward organization. Notice that it puts the effects at the beginning and the cause at the end: the logical order is to flow from cause to effect. It's not automatically wrong to put the effects first, but it would have to be done skillfully. Here, the effect is very awkward and indirect---it's a rhetorical train wreck!

D. that investigated changes in working conditions’ effects on workers’ performance
Not bad, but it's a little awkward because it's so compressed. Concision is a good thing, rhetorically: saying something in a long wordy way is bad, but it's also a problem to be too short. Notice that after the verb "investigated," there is a pile-up of nouns with no verb. There's cause-and-effect action taking place there, but no verb for that action. It's not "wrong," but awkward---not the way a skilled writer would communicate the idea.

E. to investigate what the effects changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance
This opens with an infinitive of purpose. This one would be pretty good, except for the hypothetical verb "would have." This sentence is not about something hypothetical: it's about a real historical situation, in which real conditions had effects on real workers. As in (A), the hypothetical verb tense doesn't reflect the historical reality.

The only possible answer would be (B). This is a hard question!

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
User avatar
jabhatta2
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,304
Own Kudos:
275
 [1]
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,304
Kudos: 275
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi avigutman RonTargetTestPrep AjiteshArun EducationAisle

Per my understanding - Dropping essential / non-essential modifiers - the core of any sentence should be a complete sentence in itself.

A simple example of what I mean -

Quote:
The study THAT INVESTIGATES CLIMATE CHANGE is costly

In this example - getting rid of the Subordinate THAT clause, the core of the sentence is a complete sentence in itself : The study is costly

-------------------------------

But how come this is not the case when I drop the "that clause" in (B) ?

Quote:
(Option B)

In the mid-1920’s the Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments investigating the effects that changes in working conditions would have on workers’ performance

If I drop the THAT modifier - I get

Quote:
(Option B) In the mid-1920’s the Hawthorne Works of the Western Electric Company was the scene of an intensive series of experiments investigating the effects

Post dropping of the "that clause" -- is the above sentence (post Dropping of THAT clause), now a complete sentence ?

Seems to be an incomplete sentence if you ask me.
   1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7332 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts