Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
25 Oct 2010, 01:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
62% (02:33) correct
38%
(02:25)
wrong
based on 29
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
In the United States financing of marketing research by private firms remained steady as a percentage of sales during the period between 1968 and 1978 (after correcting for inflation). But slowdowns in the growth of marketing productivity also occurred during that period, a fact that refutes the notion that the growth of marketing productivity is directly proportional to the amount invested in marketing research.
Which of the following, if true for the United States, most weakens the argument above?
(A) Federal funds, which constituted a significant portion of the support for marketing research
from 1968 to 1978, fell annually and substantially during that period.
(B) The inflation that occurred between 1968 and 1978, was more severe than leading economists had expected.
(C) Marketing executives generally favor investing an appreciably larger portion of corporate funds in short-term product development than in basic research.
(D) The advertisers who worked in marketing from 1968 to 1978 were, as a group more, experienced in their jobs than were those who worked in the marketing industry during the
previous ten-year period
(E) Corporate financing of marketing research increased, in several of the years immediately following 1978 (after correcting for inflation).
Which of the following, if true for the United States, most weakens the argument above?
(A) Federal funds, which constituted a significant portion of the support for marketing research
from 1968 to 1978, fell annually and substantially during that period.
(B) The inflation that occurred between 1968 and 1978, was more severe than leading economists had expected.
(C) Marketing executives generally favor investing an appreciably larger portion of corporate funds in short-term product development than in basic research.
(D) The advertisers who worked in marketing from 1968 to 1978 were, as a group more, experienced in their jobs than were those who worked in the marketing industry during the
previous ten-year period
(E) Corporate financing of marketing research increased, in several of the years immediately following 1978 (after correcting for inflation).
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
Ellipse
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 07 Jul 2013
Posts: 64
Given Kudos: 3
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: INSEAD Jan '13 IE '15 Kellogg 1YR '15 Sloan '16
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V35
WE:Information Technology (Finance: Investment Banking)
25 Oct 2010, 03:39
Kudos
Bookmarks
feruz77
This is an example of a causal argument.
Premise-The investment in market research has been steady by the private firms during a perticular period still the market productivity has gone down in that preriod.
Author's Conclusion - The notion that the investment in market reasearch in proportional to the market productivity did not hold true for that period.
Here, we need to bring in one more cause which can support the dilution in market productivity so that the conclusion can not stand valid.
The first choice introduces a new cause that shortened the funds invested into market research keeping the investments from private firms steady and hence the notion that martket research is a direct function of investment holds true (because the total funds invested into market research are lesser so the diminising market productivity is expected accroding to the notion that productivity is proportional to investment in research => that notion still holds true contary to the author's conclusion). And at the same time, the autor's conclustion is undermined.
Hence the correct answer is (A)
