Metal rings recently excavated from seventh-century settlements in the western part of Mexico were made using the same metallurgical techniques as those used by Ecuadorian artisans before and during that period. These techniques are sufficiently complex to make their independent development in both areas unlikely. Since the people of these two areas were in cultural contact, archaeologists hypothesize that the metallurgical techniques used to make the rings found in Mexico were learned by Mexican artisans from Ecuadorian counterparts. Which of the following would it be most useful to establish in order to evaluate the archaeologists' hypothesis? (A) Whether metal objects were traded from Ecuador to western Mexico during the seventh century (B) Whether travel between western Mexico and Ecuador in the seventh century would have been primarily by land or by sea (C) Whether artisans from western Mexico could have learned complex metallurgical techniques from their Ecuadorian counterparts without actually leaving western Mexico. (D) Whether metal tools were used in the seventh-century settlements in western Mexico (E) Whether any of the techniques used in the manufacture of the metal rings found in western Mexico are still practiced among artisans in Ecuador today ID: 100775 OG2017 Diagnostic V69 P34 Metal Rings Step 1: Identify the Question The words useful to establish in order to evaluate in the question stem indicate that this is an Evaluate the Argument question. Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument Metal rings: 7c W. Mex same tech as Ec 7c + b4 Tech complex; prob not dev ind Hyp: E dev first, M learn Abbreviate heavily. You’ll only be on this problem for a couple of minutes; your short-term memory can retain the idea that “prob not dev ind” means “probably not developed independently.” The archaeologists mentioned in the argument hypothesize that the Es developed this technology first because the technique was used in E earlier than the period in which the recently-found metal rings were made in M. Step 3: Pause and State the Goal On Evaluate questions, the goal is to find an answer choice that could “swing” the argument in two directions, either strengthening the argument or weakening it. A choice that can either strengthen or weaken the argument gives you a good way to evaluate whether the argument is valid. Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right (A) CORRECT . If metal objects were traded from E to M in the relevant timeframe, then it is at least somewhat more likely that the Es also passed along information regarding how to manufacture these objects. That would strengthen the argument. On the other hand, if such objects were not traded, then it is somewhat less likely that the Es taught the Ms how to manufacture the metal—if they weren’t trading at all, or if the Ms didn’t find the metal rings interesting enough to trade for, then it’s less likely that the Es would have an opportunity to teach the Ms how to make these rings. This would weaken the argument. Since this choice could either strengthen or weaken, it is correct. (B) How people from the two cultures may have traveled does not impact whether the Es might have taught the Ms this particular technique. What matters is that they did interact with one another in some way, not by what method they traveled. (C) The Ms could have learned the techniques from Es traveling to M. The Ms also could have learned the techniques by traveling to E. Either way, this choice does not provide additional information to help determine whether the initial hypothesis (that Es taught Ms this process) is valid. (D) The argument doesn’t depend upon whether the metal rings were created from metal tools or tools made of other materials. Nor does it specify whether the metal rings were intended as tools or were for some other purpose, such as jewelry. The question of tools is irrelevant to whether the Es taught the Ms the technique in question. (E) The argument does not hinge upon the future use of the techniques in question. It claims only that the Es taught the Ms these techniques at some point in or prior to the seventh century.

Last visit was: 18 May 2026, 17:31

It is currently 18 May 2026, 17:31

Toolkit

Critical Reasoning (CR)

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.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

May 19
How Ashutosh Scored 329 on the GRE by Keeping the Prep Simple
12:00 PM PDT
-
01:00 PM PDT
Scoring 329 on the GRE is not always about using more books, more courses, or a longer study plan. In this episode of GRE Success Talks, Ashutosh shares his GRE preparation strategy, study plan, and test-day experience, explaining how he kept his prep....
May 12
Summer savings start now on Manhattan Prep Courses!
12:00 PM EDT
-
11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products. Ends 6/1
May 15
$320 Off on GMAT Focus - Get to 735+ from any starting point
01:00 PM IST
-
11:00 AM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.
May 18
GMAT Quiz #17 - Live GMAT Practice Covering Quant, Verbal, RC, & Data Insights
10:00 AM PDT
-
11:00 AM PDT
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 25 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
May 20
Live Profile Evaluation Chat Session with ARINGO MBA admission consultants
08:00 AM PDT
-
08:30 AM PDT
What’s in it for you- Live Profile Evaluation Chat Session with Jenifer Turtschanow, CEO, ARINGO. Come with your details prepared and ARINGO will share insights! Pre-MBA Role/Industry, YOE, Exam Score, C/GPA, ECs Post-MBA Role/ Industry & School List.
Jun 10
MBA Spotlight Fair
06:00 AM PDT
-
06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..

Back to Forum

Create Topic

Metal rings recently excavated from seventh-century settlements in the

1 2

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

Joined: 13 Aug 2009

Last visit: 18 May 2026

Posts: 7,393

Own Kudos:

70,929

Given Kudos: 2,137

Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors

Location: United States (CO)

GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46 Verified score

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Posts: 7,393

Kudos: 70,929

19 Jun 2021, 07:40

Kudos

Bookmarks

darefadeji

On option D - it is stated metallurgical techniques are used. Isn't this enough to make it relevant whether they had metal tools in Mexico?

"Metallurgical techniques" doesn't imply that the tools themselves need to be made of metal. Metallurgy is just the science of producing and purifying metals. It's entirely possible that these techniques didn't involve metal tools at all -- perhaps heat and stone tools were sufficient to produce/purify the metal used in the rings. Or, perhaps the tools were made of metal! Either way, (D) gives us no insight into whether Mexican artisans learned ring-making techniques from their Ecuadorian counterparts.

(A), on the other hand, is vitally important to the author's argument. If metal objects were traded between the two countries, then it's possible that Mexican artisans never learned the techniques at all.

(A) helps us evaluate the author's argument, while (D) does not.

I hope that helps!

hadimadi

Joined: 26 Oct 2021

Last visit: 03 Dec 2022

Posts: 113

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 94

Posts: 113

Kudos: 31

12 Apr 2022, 04:53

Kudos

Bookmarks

GMATNinja

Hi,

I am still a bit confused between (A) and (D).

(D): If metal tools (in my understanding, these are tools which were used to process metal) were not used in 7th century western Mexico, then no such rings could have been crafted by Mexican artistans there -> Rings most likely were traded.
If such metal tools were found, it could be that Mexican artisans crafted them on their own, without the help of Ecuardorian artisans (Why? Because it could be that Mexicans had learnt that technique even before the Ecuadorians); but it could still be that the rings were imported.

(A): If no such trading took place -> they most likely learnt it from Ec artistans, or they had learnt it even before the artisans
If such trading took place, it could be that these rings were traded; but it is not necessarily true.

To me, (D) looks stronger.

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

Joined: 13 Aug 2009

Last visit: 18 May 2026

Posts: 7,393

Own Kudos:

70,929

Given Kudos: 2,137

Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors

Location: United States (CO)

GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46 Verified score

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Posts: 7,393

Kudos: 70,929

19 Apr 2022, 06:18

Kudos

Bookmarks

hadimadi

Your analysis of (A) looks great. If no such trading took place, it would rule out the possibility that the metal rings were made in Ecuador. This would suggest -- but not prove -- that the rings were made in Mexico. As you say, (A) would not settle the truth of the hypothesis, but it would be helpful for evaluating it.

Regarding (D), you state that metal tools are "tools which were used to process metal." But notice that this is a big assumption. Going by the author's exact words -- we know the rings were made with "metallurgical techniques" (whatever those are). But we don't know what those techniques entailed. Maybe they involved only stone tools? Or wood tools? Maybe they did involve metal tools?

Since I'm not an archaeologist (sadly!), I have no idea. But either way, the passage gives us no reason to think that metallurgical techniques involved metal tools.

That being the case, the presence or absence of metal tools in western Mexico would have no bearing on the hypothesis. For that reason, we can get rid of (D).

I hope that helps!

KNC*00#

Joined: 26 Jan 2016

Last visit: 11 Jan 2025

Posts: 3

Given Kudos: 35

Posts: 3

Kudos: 0

23 Apr 2022, 22:50

Kudos

Bookmarks

egmat

Hi,

Let's look at below two questions:

Did you score 750 on GMAT?

Did you score 750 on GMAT in Mexico?

Would both questions help you in finding out whether the person has scored 750 on GMAT or not?

The answer is No. While the answer to the first question will obviously help you in determining whether the person has scored 750 on GMAT or not, the answer to the second question may not. If the answer to the second question is no, we have no clue whether the person did not score 750 on GMAT or he scored 750 but not in Mexico.

So, we can't really ignore part of questions to understand their meaning.

Now, let's look at option C:

(C) Whether artisans from western Mexico could have learned complex metallurgical techniques from their Ecuadorian counterparts without actually leaving western Mexico.

This is similar as saying "whether you can score more than 750 on GMAT without taking an classes". This is different from saying "whether you can score more than 750 on GMAT". The latter question is more about your capability to score 750 while the former question is more about your dependence on classes to score more than 750.

Similarly, option C is concerned about whether artisans could have learnt those techniques without leaving western Mexico. Now, we understand that learning inside or outside Mexico is irrelevant for us. Therefore, option C is irrelevant and incorrect.

score780

Since when exchange of products means exchange of skills to make the products, especially that we are talking about "complex techniques". Conversations between the two people is an assumption.

Now, the highlighted part is wrong here. Conversation between the two groups is not an assumption here. The passage very clearly states that "the people of these two areas were in cultural contact".

Now, coming to option A as to why it is correct

The conclusion is "the metallurgical techniques used to make the rings found in Mexico were learned by Mexican artisans from Ecuadorian counterparts."

This is based on the premise that "Metal rings recently excavated form seventh-century settlements in the western part of Mexico were made using the same metallurgical techniques as those used by Ecuadorian artisans before and during that period."

Now, what if Mexican artists didn't even create these metal rings. What if these metal rings were actually created by Ecuadorian artisans and then brought through trade in Mexico? In that case, can we say that Mexican artists learnt techniques from Ecuadorian counterparts? No. In that case, we would be even doubtful whether Mexican artists knew about the techniques or not.

Hi,

My reason of doubting Option A : Whether metal objects were traded from Ecuador to western Mexico during the seventh century.

Conclusion - metallurgical techniques used to make the rings found in Mexico were learned by Mexican artisans from Ecuadorian counterparts

Lets say YES, metal objects were traded from Ecuador to western Mexico during the seventh century - This can strengthen the conclusion because this establishes the reason that there was actually trade (or cultural contact) between the people of these two places in the seventh century, hence people in western Mexico might have learnt the metallurgical techniques from their Ecuadorian counterparts. This option can also weaken the conclusion as explained in your post.

Now, lets say NO metal objects were not traded from Ecuador to western Mexico during the seventh century - This again neither strengthens nor weakens the conclusion because objects could have been traded from Western Mexico to Ecuador. This doesn't say anything to establish or negate the presence of trade (or cultural contact) between them.

I cannot reason why Option A is the correct answer.

Regards,
Kaushal

kdk21

Joined: 29 Nov 2020

Last visit: 27 Apr 2026

Posts: 17

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 1,376

GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V44 Verified score

Posts: 17

Kudos: 6

06 Feb 2023, 22:04

Kudos

Bookmarks

What does the argument say? It says that two regions use same metallurgical technique (Mexico and Ecuador). But the technique is complex, hence only one of them could have invented it, and one would have shown the other. From this, author concluded that people in mexico learnt the technique from Ecuadorian people.

You should focus only on this part when evaluating the options- author concluded that "people in mexico learnt the technique from Ecuadorian people."

(A) Whether metal objects were traded from Ecuador to western Mexico during the seventh century?

Suppose that metal object were traded, does this info help us reject or accept the author's conclusion? Yes, it does. How? If the metals objects were traded then it is possible that Mexican folks didn't need to learn the technique at all. They could have just bought the objects.

(B) Whether travel between western Mexico and Ecuador in the seventh century would have been primarily by land or by sea

Suppose that travel was by Sea, does this info help us reject or accept the author's conclusion? No, it doesn't. We don't care what was the means of travel. Our concern is was the technique learnt or not.

(C) Whether artisans from western Mexico could have learned complex metallurgical techniques from their Ecuadorian counterparts without actually leaving western Mexico.

Suppose that Mexican didn't need to leave West Mexico, does this info help us reject or accept the author's conclusion? No, it doesn't. We don't care if they needed to leave or not. It is possible that Ecuadorians came to mexico and taught them or it could be the other way around. But this info doesn't help us accept or reject our conclusion

(D) Whether metal tools were used in the seventh-century settlements in western Mexico

Suppose that metal tools were used, does this info help us reject or accept the author's conclusion? No, it doesn't. The passage just says that metal tools were found, also even if the tools were not used, it is possible that mexican built the tools and exported it to some other regions. Info about usage doesn't help us accept or reject the conclusion

(E) Whether any of the techniques used in the manufacture of the metal rings found in western Mexico are still practiced among artisans in Ecuador today

Suppose that those techniques are still practiced, does this info help us reject or accept the author's conclusion? No, it doesn't. We don't care if they are still practiced, our only concern is did the mexicans learn the technique or not?

ndwz

Joined: 02 Jul 2024

Last visit: 26 Mar 2026

Posts: 55

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 22

Posts: 55

Kudos: 3

04 Mar 2025, 18:03

Kudos

Bookmarks

I got the answer right using the same process as described by GMATNinja , however, something that is bothering me is the word "cultural contact" in the stimulus, which led me to spending more time on answer choice C. Would anyone please be able to explain why this is irrelevant? Thank you!

GMATNinja

Since we are trying to evaluate the archaeologists' hypothesis, let's start by identifying that hypothesis: "the metallurgical techniques used to make the rings found in Mexico were learned by Mexican artisans from Ecuadorian counterparts."

Great, now let's break down the reasoning that supports that hypothesis:

Metal rings were recently found in the ruins of 7th-century settlements in the western part of Mexico.
Those rings were made using the same techniques as those used by Ecuadorian artisans before and during the 7th century. So it is likely (though not certain) that the Ecuadorians were using those techniques before the people in western Mexico.
The techniques used to make the rings are pretty complex, so it's unlikely that the techniques were developed independently in each location. If we had been talking about some simple process, it would be possible that each civilization developed the process on their own. But in this case, it is more likely that only ONE of the two cultures developed the techniques.
The people of western Mexico were in cultural contact with the people of Ecuador. Therefore, it is possible that the groups learned from one another.

According to the archaeologists, this evidence suggests that the Mexican artisans learned how to make the rings from the Ecuadorian artisans. What would be most useful to establish in order to evaluate the archaeologists' hypothesis?

Quote:

(A) Whether metal objects were traded from Ecuador to western Mexico during the seventh century

We know that it is unlikely that both groups developed the techniques for making the rings independently. As a result, the archaeologists believe that the people in western Mexico must have learned to make the rings from the Ecuadorians. But what if the people in western Mexico NEVER actually made the rings? What if they simply traded with the Ecuadorians for their rings? That would nullify the hypothesis, so let's hang on to this one.

Quote:

(B) Whether travel between western Mexico and Ecuador in the seventh century would have been primarily by land or by sea

It doesn't matter HOW the two groups were in contact. All that matters is that the two groups were in cultural contact. This information is irrelevant, so eliminate (B).

Quote:

(C) Whether artisans from western Mexico could have learned complex metallurgical techniques from their Ecuadorian counterparts without actually leaving western Mexico.

The archaeologists argue that the artisans from western Mexico learned the techniques from their Ecuadorian counterparts, but the archaeologists don't care about WHERE that learning took place. Whether it took place in Mexico, Ecuador, or somewhere else, the archaeologists hypothesis could still be valid. (C) can thus be eliminated.

Quote:

(D) Whether metal tools were used in the seventh-century settlements in western Mexico

We want to determine whether the artisans from western Mexico learned the techniques for making the metal rings from the Ecuadorian artisans. We have no idea what kinds of tools were used by the Ecuadorians to make those rings (maybe the tools were metal, maybe they were not), so choice (D) can be eliminated.

Quote:

(E) Whether any of the techniques used in the manufacture of the metal rings found in western Mexico are still practiced among artisans in Ecuador today

The hypothesis is only concerned with 7th-century artisans in western Mexico and whether those artisans learned how to make metal rings from Ecuadorian artisans during that time. It makes no difference whether those techniques are still used in Ecuador today, so eliminate (E).

Choice (A) is the best answer.

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

Joined: 13 Aug 2009

Last visit: 18 May 2026

Posts: 7,393

Own Kudos:

70,929

[2]

Given Kudos: 2,137

Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors

Location: United States (CO)

GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46 Verified score

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Posts: 7,393

Kudos: 70,929

[2]

17 Mar 2025, 15:54

Kudos

Bookmarks

ndwz

(C) is irrelevant because of the "without actually leaving western Mexico" part.

It doesn't matter WHERE the cultural contact occurred. Maybe it was in Mexico, maybe in Ecuador, or maybe anywhere else where both groups traveled. All that matters is that the two groups were in fact in cultural contact.

As a result, it would have been POSSIBLE for the groups to learn from one another. The LOCATION of the cultural contact doesn't matter, so answer (C) wouldn't help.

AnuK2222

Joined: 17 Sep 2023

Last visit: 13 Oct 2025

Posts: 121

Own Kudos:

114

Given Kudos: 845

Location: India

Schools: ISB '25

GPA: 3.8

WE:Project Management (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

Schools: ISB '25

Posts: 121

Kudos: 114

26 Apr 2025, 00:50

Kudos

Bookmarks

A very interesting insight I had while solving this Q (I got it wrong the first time around) is that the best answer for an evaluate question is one where based on the answer (ie new info) one side can fill any gaps in arguement/claim and other will weaken the claim. If an option does not lead to this situation it might be not the best answer (in my case it was option C which sounded right but A led to a proper place where claim could be strengthened or weakened)