Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveri

Question

Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries. They used the works of famous scientists in an attempt to prove that analogy brings about creativity and thereby changes in knowledge. They continued to argue that distant analogies those scientists used could develop a new framework in a certain domain or even form a new domain - the more distant the analogies, the more creative the outcomes.

Which of the following statements, if true, makes the first claim made by the researchers vulnerable to criticism?

A. Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries.

B. Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems.

C. Analogical interpretations play a key role in arriving at many scientific empirical formulae.

D. Analogy items are frequently used in IQ tests to measure analytical ability of a person.

E. Analytical ability is a more important factor in scientific discoveries than creativity.

Sherlockgun · Accepted Answer

I think causal relationship exists in the passage. 
Analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries. 
More distant analogies => more creative outcomes.

To weaken, we generally have to say effect leads to cause i.e. people with more creativity uses analogical thinking. (B)

Posted from my mobile device

dina98 · Answer

The claim is "Analogical thinking leads to creative outcomes and eventually scientific discoveries"
A reaffirms that so B is better.

chesstitans · Answer

yeah, this is a classical pattern in gmat
E is a trap because "more important" does not eliminate the possibility that creativity will lead to new discoveries. Also, "more important" does not show how "Analytical ability" weakens "analogical thinking"

abhishekdadarwal2009 · Answer

Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries. They used the works of famous scientists in an attempt to prove that analogy brings about creativity and thereby changes in knowledge. They continued to argue that distant analogies those scientists used could develop a new framework in a certain domain or even form a new domain - the more distant the analogies, the more creative the outcomes.

Which of the following statements, if true, makes the first claim made by the researchers vulnerable to criticism?

A. Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries.  but this does not talk about analogical thinking.
 B. Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems. This choice says that its no the anological thinking that leads to discoveries but the creative people that uses this approach to solve the problems and thus this choice weakens the argument.
 C. Analogical interpretations play a key role in arriving at many scientific empirical formulae.  does not weaken
 D. Analogy items are frequently used in IQ tests to measure analytical ability of a person.   IQ test is out of scope.
 E. Analytical ability is a more important factor in scientific discoveries than creativity.  Analytical ability is out of scope.

sandeepb17 · Answer

Conclusion:- Analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries.

Premise:- 1. works of famous scientists
 2. Analogy causes creativity, and creativity causes changes in knowledge.
 3. more distant analogies, the more creative the outcomes.

Assumption:- changes is knowledge is same as or causes scientific discoveries.

Option A:- This option is strengthening the arguments. Its not attacking the underlying assumption. Its merely coexisting with the assumption. See premise point no. 2.

Option B:- Classic weakener. correct answer. Argument says X causes Y. But this options says that Y causes X.
Analogical thinking induces creativity or analogical thinking make people creative (According to the argument). But the option says, No. Its other way round. Creative peoples uses analogical thinking to make discoveries.
 
Option C:- U may think of this option as strengthener or out of scope. Either way its a wrong answer. If we assume scientific empirical formulae are critical for scientific discoveries, then Its a strengthener. If not, its out of scope.

Option D:- Easiest option to eliminate. OUT OF SCOPE. How come IQ is related to scientific discoveries. Not mentioned in the argument.

Option E:- A contender for option B. Important factors and causality are two different things. Analytical ability may be a more important factor than creativity. But this option fails to answer whether it causes creativity or scientific discoveries. It may cause or may not. Hence, not a correct option.

Please excuse for any typo-error.
Thanks.

profileusername · Answer

I have found that less wordy Critical Reasoning questions are at least easier to understand, even if they yield a high percentage of incorrect answers, than the more wordy ones. Especially, when the question points out the conclusion itself.

Conclusion that needs to be weakened:  Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries.

A. Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries.  Incorrect.   (It's a strengthener of sorts reinforcing the link between analogical thinking and creativity).

B. Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems.  Correct.   (This doesn't appear to be a straightforward weakener at first glance so we will look at it again).

C. Analogical interpretations play a key role in arriving at many scientific empirical formulae.  Incorrect.   (The keyword here: "many". It doesn't talk about all scientific formulae. Also, scientific empirical formulae are a subset of the scientific discoveries. This leaves other possibilities for other scientific discoveries which may not happen due to analogical interpretations).

D. Analogy items are frequently used in IQ tests to measure analytical ability of a person.  Incorrect.   (More or less the same reasoning as for option C).

E. Analytical ability is a more important factor in scientific discoveries than creativity.  Incorrect.   (This targets the premise that links analogical thinking with creativity and ultimately, scientific discovery. Analytical ability could play a more important role than creativity in scientific discoveries, yet it doesn't negate the role of creativity in those discoveries. Premise stays intact).

Option B:  In comparison with other options, option B opens up the possibility of a reversal of cause-effect relationship. If highly creative people sometimes use analogical methods then it opens up the possibility that it's not the analogical thinking that results in creativity but vice versa. The potentially deceiving word here is "sometimes" but even a possibility of a few instances of the reverse cause-effect relationship is sufficient to make room for an alternate possibility. And that's sufficient to weaken the argument.

KarishmaB · Answer

The question tests your understanding of correlation vs cause-effect. 
Analogical thinking and scientific discoveries are often found together. Researchers claim that analogical thinking brings creativity which causes discoveries. What will weaken this? The cause effect is the other way around - if creative people use analogies. That could explain why analogy use is found with discoveries. 
"sometimes" doesn't have a crucial role to play here. The argument doesn't say that everyone who uses analogies becomes creative and discovers new things. Researchers used work of some famous scientists to establish the use of analogies. If creative people sometimes use analogies, that could explain why they are found in their work. Then it weakens the hypothesis that analogies cause creativity.

Answer (B)

ravigupta2912 · Answer

Tough one. Frankly, I could not "clearly" understand why B is correct, but what is clear is that rest of the four options are clearly incorrect.

Conclusion Analogy ---> scientific Discovery
Premise - Analogy --> Creativity --> knowledge

A. Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries. -- Trap. Since speaks similar language as passage but in reality strengthens the argument or in a way rephrases the premise. Eliminate

B. Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems. -- Reverses the causality and hence weakens the conclusion.

C. Analogical interpretations play a key role in arriving at many scientific empirical formulae. -- Strengthener. Eliminate.

D. Analogy items are frequently used in IQ tests to measure analytical ability of a person. -- Irrelevant. Eliminate. We are not concerned with measurement of analytical ability.

E. Analytical ability is a more important factor in scientific discoveries than creativity. -- Irrelevant what is more important. Whether analogical thinking can lead to scientific discovery, or even if it can aid, the conclusion will stand. So this is irrelevant. Eliminate.

AndrewN  - request if you can comment on thought process.

It took me 4mins and 45 secs though - pretty sure i'll mess this in exam conditions.

AndrewN · Answer

With respect to the content creator(s), I do not think either the phrasing or the logic of the correct answer presents a compelling case, at least not for GMAT™ purposes. I think your reasoning is sound and could be applied to more fitting questions for the task at hand: official, GMAC™-created questions. As such, I would not worry about the 4:45. (You probably know by now that I like to stress accuracy first.)

- Andrew

Hatakekakashi · Answer

Claim - Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries. They used the works of famous scientists in an attempt to prove that analogy brings about creativity and thereby changes in knowledge

anology - creativity - change in knowledge

We need to look at an alternative

what if creative people used analogy

this is only explained by (B)

YashYashkratos · Answer

correlation vs causation argument -
Idea - analogy helps creativity leading to discoveries and thus studying great scientists works where they use analogy can help people get creative and thus make discoveries.
B) weakens the idea by saying they don't get creative or become smart through analogies but use them because they are smart.

sevenfive · Answer

KarishmaB 
 mikemcgarry 
 souvik101990

Would love to know your views!

My understanding of why option A may be right
A. Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries.

Lets break the sentence - Creativity brings irrelevant or remote ideas together 
Creativity leads to scientific discoveries

Creativity brings irrelevant or remote ideas together - Lets deep dive this part of option A
Merriam Dictionary definition of analogy - The meaning of ANALOGY is a comparison of two otherwise unlike things based on resemblance of a particular aspect
This is what creativity does - Creativity causes analogy by bringing two irrelevant or remote ideas together (which are otherwise unlike).

So this statement reverses the causation as given in the question 
This is better than B because B has the words 'Highly' and 'sometimes'

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveri

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveri

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards