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

It is currently 20 Mar 2019, 06:31

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

Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and

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

Hide Tags

 
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Posts: 13
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
Schools: CUHK '15
GPA: 3.6
GMAT ToolKit User
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 19 Jan 2019, 02:51
1
11
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

68% (01:58) correct 32% (02:13) wrong based on 406 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and promotions depend significantly on the amount of their published work. People responsible for making hiring and promotion decisions in the biomedical research field, however, are influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications.

The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?


(A) Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field.

(B) Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published.

(C) The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.

(D) People responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers can reasonably be expected to make a fair assessment of the overall impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field.

(E) Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one.


ANSWER is E
Could someone pls explain....

Does E says that if a candidate has done one particular research and he has fragmented them into ten publications, and due to which the comitte will be misguided that he has done ten publications and hence will increase the chance of his promotions

Also How B is wrong here

Originally posted by iyersu on 18 Dec 2013, 08:46.
Last edited by Bunuel on 19 Jan 2019, 02:51, edited 3 times in total.
Renamed the topic, edited the question and added the OA.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 Sep 2011
Posts: 4
Schools: ISB '16
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Dec 2013, 09:50
2
Hi

Here is how you should solve this one when in GMAT.

Let us first paraphrase the argument given

BMR: Hir.&Promo dep. no. of published work

Ppl. (Hir n Promo): Impact > no. of work

the above argument is against which of the following claims ?

prethink : if the argument is against the following claim then argument, it would lay less importance impact and more on number

let see which option does this

A. this remotely supports the argument and is not anti
B. OOS, as published or not published is not scope of the work
C. not-yet published is OOS
D.This is assumption of the argument given so it cannot be anti claim as assumption supports the arg.
E. By elimination --> yes
but even if you prethink , E fits the bill because given argument goes against the strategy of increasing chances of promotion by splitting work into many.

Thanks

Apoorva
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 277
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Dec 2013, 10:32
1
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and promotions depend significantly on the amount of their published work. People responsible for making hiring and promotion decisions in the biomedical research field, however, are influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications.
The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?
A. Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field.
B. Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published.
C. The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.
D. People responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers can reasonably be expected to make a fair assessment of the overall impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field.
E. Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one.

A. Of course if hiring is based on a candidate's scientific publications, "A" stands.
b. Again impact of a candidate's scientific publications means its a published work.
c. This may be an acceptable case.
d. We have to assume this.
e. Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one. It means that number of publications is more important in hirings and promotion than overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have. The passage arguments go against this statement hence this is the correct answer......
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 101
Location: India
WE: Supply Chain Management (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Dec 2013, 12:25
1
Understanding the question stem is important before looking at the answer choices. Here we are required to find an answer choice that goes against the information given in the argument. Or in the other words 4 of the choices go hand in hand with the given argument.

Clearly choices A,B,C,D can be easily followed from the information given in the argument. Only E contradicts the information in the passage which says overall impact of publications on the field is important rather than the number of publications.
_________________

+1 KUDOS is the best way to say thanks :-)

"Pay attention to every detail"

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 27 Dec 2012
Posts: 75
Location: United States (LA)
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V41
GPA: 3.51
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Dec 2013, 19:17
The paragraph basically argues that it is the overall impact of a researchers findings that is important in promotions, not the amount of publications that the researcher has achieved. E., in a sense, states that biomedical researchers achieve promotion by spreading/increasing the number of promotions, which the paragraph disproves.
Current Student
avatar
S
Joined: 31 Dec 2015
Posts: 49
Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q44 V38
GMAT 2: 680 Q44 V39
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jul 2017, 09:22
iyersu wrote:
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and promotions depend significantly on the amount of their published work. People responsible for making hiring and promotion decisions in the biomedical research field, however, are influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications.
The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?
A. Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field.
B. Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published.
C. The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.
D. People responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers can reasonably be expected to make a fair assessment of the overall impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field.
E. Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one.


ANSWER is E
Could someone pls explain....

Does E says that if a candidate has done one particular research and he has fragmented them into ten publications, and due to which the comitte will be misguided that he has done ten publications and hence will increase the chance of his promotions

Also How B is wrong here




Though this is a pretty old post, I humbly request all to Please stop explicitly typing the answers and doubts just below the questions.
There is no point in solving the question if the answer is just below the question !!
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 05 Nov 2014
Posts: 106
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GMAT 1: 580 Q49 V21
GPA: 3.75
Reviews Badge
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jul 2017, 10:25
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and promotions depend significantly on the amount of their published work. People responsible for making hiring and promotion decisions in the biomedical research field, however, are influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications.
The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?
A. Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field.
B. Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published.
C. The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.
D. People responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers can reasonably be expected to make a fair assessment of the overall impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field.
E. Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one.


Solution:

This is weaken question. The question stem is: The argument strongly goes against which of the following claims?

The argument says that the number of publications are not important but the quality( Scientific Publication).

But Option E points out that researchers ca increase their chances of promotion by increasing the no. of publications being published. ie publishing their findings over many journals instead of one.

This goes against the argument is therefore the answer. (Option E).
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 02 Oct 2018
Posts: 57
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Dec 2018, 04:03
DmitryFarber

Request you to step in here.

Here is my understanding of the argument-
Junior researchers believe that their chances of promotion lie on the number of publications they make (quantity over quality).
But the people who hire junior researchers prefer quality of the publications and it's impact over the no. of publications.

We need to find a statement that weakens this.

How does (E) weaken the argument?

also, could you explain why (B) is wrong?
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Aug 2018
Posts: 44
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Feb 2019, 02:25
why c is not correct answer

GMATNinja
_________________

Spread some happiness..Press Kudos! :)

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Aug 2018
Posts: 7
Re: Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Feb 2019, 00:55
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and promotions depend significantly on the amount of their published work. People responsible for making hiring and promotion decisions in the biomedical research field, however, are influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications.

The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?


(A) Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field.

(B) Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published.

(C) The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.

(D) People responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers can reasonably be expected to make a fair assessment of the overall impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field.

(E) Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one.

i was confused between A and E. On what grounds do we negate A?
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2329
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2019, 11:40
ParthSanghavi wrote:
DmitryFarber

Request you to step in here.

Here is my understanding of the argument-
Junior researchers believe that their chances of promotion lie on the number of publications they make (quantity over quality).
But the people who hire junior researchers prefer quality of the publications and it's impact over the no. of publications.

We need to find a statement that weakens this.

How does (E) weaken the argument?

also, could you explain why (B) is wrong?

KaranB1 wrote:
why c is not correct answer

GMATNinja

The passage describes a belief held by junior biomedical researchers that "their hirings and promotions depend significantly on the amount of their published work." This belief is contradicted by the fact that the people actually in charge of hiring and promoting biomedical researchers are "influenced much more by the overall impact that a candidate's scientific publications have on his or her field than by the number of those publications."

Take another look at the question stem:
Quote:
The information above, if accurate, argues most strongly against which of the following claims?

This is not a typical "weaken" question, in which we would use an answer choice to weaken the argument in the passage -- instead, we need to use the information in the passage to argue against an answer choice.

With this in mind, let's go through the answer choices:
Quote:
(A) Even biomedical researchers who are just beginning their careers are expected already to have published articles of major significance to the field.

Going back to the question stem, we need to ask: does the information in the passage argue against this answer choice?

From the passage, we know that the people responsible for hiring and promoting junior biomedical researchers are influenced by the impact of a candidate's publications on his/her field when making hiring or promotion decisions. This seems to support the idea that researchers "just beginning their careers" need to have already published works of significance in order to get hired.

It could also be the case that "junior biomedical researchers" are not quite the same population as researchers "just beginning their career." If this is the case, then the passage does not give any information either way on the expected impact publications of researchers just beginning their careers.

Either way, the passage certainly does not argue against the statement in answer choice (A), so it can be eliminated.

Quote:
(B) Contributions to the field of biomedical research are generally considered to be significant only if the work is published.

The passage tells us that both junior biomedical researchers and the people who hire and promote these researchers believe some aspect of published works to be important in the hiring and promotion process.

Notice that answer choice (B) does not mention the hiring or promotion process -- it is a statement about the importance of a contribution in general, not just in regards to hiring/promotion decisions. The passage simply does not give us any information about the significance of works outside of the hiring/promotion process, whether those works are published or not. Based on this, you can't say that the information in the passage argues against this answer choice. (B) is out.

Quote:
(C) The potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account in decisions regarding the hiring or promotion of biomedical researchers.

From the passage, we know that both junior biomedical researchers and the people who hire and promote these researchers believe some aspect of published works to be important in the hiring and promotion process. However, the passage does not give us information on what the people responsible for hirings/promotions think about "not-yet-published work." It is entirely possible that not-yet-published work "sometimes" plays a role in the hiring or promotion process. So, we cannot conclude that the information in the passage argues against the idea that "the potential scientific importance of not-yet-published work is sometimes taken into account" in hiring or promotion decisions. We can eliminate (C).

Quote:
(D) People responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers can reasonably be expected to make a fair assessment of the overall impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field.

We know from the passage that the people responsible for hiring or promoting biomedical researchers are influenced by the impact of a candidate's publications on his or her field. However, we have no way of knowing how "fair" these assessments of impact are -- maybe there is an objective way of assessing impact, or maybe it depends entirely on how the hiring manager happens to feel that day. Because the passage does not address fairness, we cannot conclude that it argues against this answer choice. (D) is out.

Quote:
(E) Biomedical researchers can substantially increase their chances of promotion by fragmenting their research findings so that they are published in several journals instead of one.

The people responsible for hiring/promotion decisions are influenced more by the impact of published works than the number of published works.

If biomedical researchers "fragment[ed] their research findings so that they are published in several different journals instead of one," they would increase the number of publications, but would not change the impact of their research findings.

So, fragmenting their research findings would not substantially increase their chances of promotion. The information in the passage clearly argues against the statement in answer choice (E), so this is our answer.

I hope that helps!
_________________

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
Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and   [#permalink] 11 Mar 2019, 11:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Junior biomedical researchers have long assumed that their hirings and

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


cron
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®.