Many GMAT tutors love to make boastful public claims about how many pe

Many GMAT tutors love to make boastful public claims about how many perfect 800s they have earned on the GMAT. Yet when GMAC publicly introduced an official score verification option in 2017, using the test-taker’s date of birth (DOB) and a unique URL only available to the test-taker, only one one of those tutors claiming perfect scores actually stepped forward to prove his perfect 800, while countless others did not. Given the fact that 2 years later, these tutors still have failed to verify their scores, it is clear that many, if not most, of those "perfect" GMAT scores were faked.

Which of the following would be most useful to know in evaluating the strength of this argument?

A) Whether GMAT scores expire after 5 years and thus some older scores could not be verified
B) Whether tutors have a financial incentive to exaggerate or inflate their scores
C) Whether tutors who have perfect 800s would choose to advertise that fact publicly
D) Whether all tutors are aware of the score verification option
E) Whether faking scores as a GMAT tutor is helpful in finding students

ANSWER CHOICE ANALYSIS:

A) Correct. Although GMAT tutors can always retake a more recent GMAT to prove their ability, if it is indeed true that GMAT scores expire after 5 years and thus there is no way to verify older scores (it is!), then this could help explain why some GMAT tutors with legitimate perfect 800 scores have not verified. LIKE MANY CORRECT ANSWERS ON GMAT CRITICAL REASONING, THIS ANSWER PROVIDES AN ALTERNATE EXPLANATION FOR WHY SOME TUTORS MIGHT NOT HAVE VERIFIED THEIR GMAT SCORES.

If true, this consideration would weaken the conclusion in a tangible way. If false, this consideration would strengthen the conclusion in a tangible way. And that's how we know we have found the correct answer.

B) Although financial incentives would certainly help explain the motivation to fake one's scores, it doesn't directly pertain to the conclusion (whether many/most of the scores were faked). For example, in a police investigation, proving a motive in a crime (he wanted to make money!) is not as effective as providing actual evidence (he left his fingerprints at the scene!).

C) This answer is irrelevant. It is also "pre-evidence" and "out of scope" because the argument only pertains to those tutors who have previously advertised their perfect scores.

D) Being unaware of the score verification option might prevent tutors from verifying their scores, but since this information was shared "publicly" by GMAC over 2 years ago, it is unlikely that any professional GMAT tutor would not be privy to this information.

E) Similar to B. Provides a possible motive, but not hard evidence.