It is currently 22 Jan 2018, 08:36

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 07 Sep 2015
Posts: 6
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2016, 07:15
Nevernevergiveup wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age.
In fact, however, simply talking to other people-that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills-suffices.
Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.
advice regarding physical capacities cannot weaken evidence.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.
evidence is regarding medical conditions and treatments is completely out of scope and does not affect conclusion.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.
(both are considered together but we need support one over other. cannot be assumed.)

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.
(we have no info reg prior collected data so we cannot say that it is proper.)

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.
(we just said intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems help us maintain mental sharpness but nowhere the fact that they are similar to math problems affects the conclusion. This does not help to weaken the conclusion or support intellectual activities over conversation or social skills in improving mental sharpness.)

I just don't find any choice correct. I don't understand how B weakens the conclusion.

I also did not find any choice in first attempt but when looked at answer B, it made complete sense.
A does not cause B. Instead B causes A. So people suffering with decease tend to be isolated. And we mistakenly conclude that since these people were not engaged in social conversations, they suffered with weak mental health.

Hope this makes sense to you also.
Intern
Joined: 28 Jun 2015
Posts: 45
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 610 Q49 V27
GPA: 2.5
WE: Project Management (Telecommunications)
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2016, 08:01
EMPOWERgmatMax wrote:
manojsundar1 wrote:
i guess here we know that"the cause caused the effect". So B says that something else caused both the cause and the effect.hence it weakens.Am i right EMPOWERgmatMax?

I'd be happy to clarify further! The key to understanding why option B weakens the argument requires paraphrasing the conclusion, and taking that paraphrase an extra step (and that’s the core reason why this question is up there on the difficulty spectrum):

The argument is essentially saying that social interaction boosts mental sharpness.

Paraphrased conclusion
That claim could be paraphrased to say: without social interaction, mental sharpness would be reduced.

Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

And since B) has a classic GMAT style double-negative, let's paraphrase B) too:
Many medical conditions and treatments that reduce mental sharpness also tend to reduce social interaction.

That means B) is saying:
Medical Conditions and TreatmentsMental Sharpness ⬇, Social Interaction ⬇.

So option B is introducing this Medical Conditions and Treatments alternative cause that impacts both social interaction and mental sharpness. So it's not that social ➧ mental, they go hand in hand attributable to another cause, thereby weakening the argument.

A tricky one! Definitely one of the trickiest of the new CRs in the 2016 OG, for sure.

Bigger GMAT Picture:
On tricky causal arguments, ACT/GMAC won’t just come out and say that it’s this other cause. That can be too obvious: for example, check out this low difficulty OG question with an obvious alternative cause: in-the-last-decade-there-has-been-a-significant-decrease-in-136789.html

On tougher causal questions (like this Intellectual Activities question), ACT/GMAC will try to muddle the relationships with double negatives, or reversing the causality altogether.
For example: The food truck must have been successful because now they have a restaurant. Weakener: Well actually, the restaurant came first, and then they started operating the food truck.

So, if you're consistently scoring in the Verbal 40+ range, expect the causal arguments you see to involve that extra layer.

I am confused all the way till i see this one!
My mistake is that i did figure out the meaning of option(B)
I read it in a opposite way as i didn't notice there is a subordinate clause (that blabla...)
100 kudos!
：（
Director
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 645
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2016, 06:10
WillGetIt wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people-that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills-suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

Hit +Kudos, if you like this post.

Ok.. kind of tough .. B and E are the only options that make sense in a quick glance.
ONE THING THAT NO ONE MENTIONED IN THIER ANSWER IS "THIS QUESTION ASKS US TO ATTACK THE PREMISE AND NOT THE CONCLUSION" ----> Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

We have to reduce the impact that the Premise is having in shaping this argument ? We have to kill the power of the premise. We have to make the Premise weak and absurd.

Premise 1) Popular belief says doing puzzle and math helps a person to stay mentally alert
Premise 2) Study shows that people with more social contact have better mental skill
Conclusion ) Social interaction that requires mental and perpetual skills is sufficient to maintain mental alertness and mental skill

B says :- Medicine that makes u a retard (less alert) also makes you shy.(less social)
(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.
This choice makes PREMISE 2 look weak and silly and reversed in logical direction. (cause -effect)

E says :- It seemed like they were conversation but people were UNKNOWINGLY doing math during the study.
E ) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.
BAMM:- Many of you thought that E was weakening the argument . It is actually strengthening the argument by strengthening PREMISE 1.

SO only one correct answer B
_________________

Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.

Manager
Joined: 18 Sep 2015
Posts: 108
GMAT 1: 610 Q43 V31
GMAT 2: 610 Q47 V27
GMAT 3: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 4: 700 Q49 V35
WE: Project Management (Health Care)
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Oct 2016, 00:23
WillGetIt wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people-that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills-suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

Hit +Kudos, if you like this post.

The stimulus establishes the following logical chain:

More [Social Contact] -> Social interaction -> More Mental Skills -> More [Mental Sharpness]

Now answer choice B is somthing one must know in the gamt: a general description of one parameter as the other parameter changes can weaken or strengthen an argument becuase is talk about a relationship between 2 parameters.

Less Mental Sharpness --> less Social Contact

Now, if you'll look at the original logical chain you can clearly see that:
[ Social Contact ] -> [ Mental Sharpness ] but option B says the opposite.

This clearly weakens the causational relationship between the parameters.
Intern
Joined: 29 May 2015
Posts: 15
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Nov 2016, 22:54
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people-that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills-suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.
(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.
(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.
(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.
(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

This was a tough question as the question alludes students to think that the problem hinges upon "the evidence cited".
But I think the important word in the question is "the force of". So the problem is not the evidence itself but the conclusion supported by the evidence.

The conclusion of this q is "simply talking to other people...suffices".
So, we need to find a weakner.

B is saying that medical conditions/treatments cause people to limit "pariticpating in social interactions".
So "simply talking to other people..." is NOT sufficient if you on medical conditions/treatments.

Hope this helps.
Manager
Status: Manager to Damager!
Affiliations: MBA
Joined: 22 May 2014
Posts: 79
Location: United States
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2017, 04:36
I understand why B is right..
But I dont get why E is wrong.

E says that the tasks in the study were more akin to maths than to conversation.
So, the assumption behind evidence itself is wrong. It is indirectly saying evidence is not valid.
So, it is weakener..

Whats wrong in my thinking? Can anyone elaborate more on option E?

Thanks...
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 181
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jan 2017, 10:32
MorningRunner wrote:
I understand why B is right..
But I dont get why E is wrong.

E says that the tasks in the study were more akin to maths than to conversation.
So, the assumption behind evidence itself is wrong. It is indirectly saying evidence is not valid.
So, it is weakener..

Whats wrong in my thinking? Can anyone elaborate more on option E?

Thanks...

Hi MorningRunner,

I'm happy to help. E) This option attacks the wrong end of the causal relationship. We need an option that points to an alternative cause of a boost in mental skills (as in we need an option that shows that it’s not social interaction that boosts mental skills). This option just attempts to redefine how mental skill is defined by the study, and the option in NO way addresses the cause of the heightened mental skills. Instead, if this option had attacked the cause rather than the effect, then it would weaken too. For example, if it said: “The tasks defining social interaction compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to social interaction” then this option would then reveal that there is a totally different cause other than social interaction.

Here's the full EMPOWERgmat explanation, including some broader advice about how this question relates to GMAT Verbal as a whole: og-2016-intellectual-activities-202263.html#p1553257

PS: You might already know about this, but in case not, you can quickly filter down to the best explanations and analysis for any post at GMAT Club by clicking the Sort by Kudos tab. This thread is already so long that sorting by Kudos is really the only way to distill the most potent analysis for this question.
_________________

"Students study. GMAT assassins train."

★★★★★ GMAT Club Verified Reviews for EMPOWERgmat & Special Discount

GMAT Club Verbal Advantage EMPOWERgmat Critical Reasoning Question Pack

Intern
Joined: 25 Sep 2016
Posts: 28
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2017, 05:39
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
samdighe wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
Actually, here the argument says: A leads to B.
A - Social interactions

Option (B) says that actually lack of B is the cause of lack of A. So when A is there, B is also there and hence, we may feel that A causes B but A may not actually be the cause of B.

Could you please explain why is option E wrong?

Let me add here that (E), if anything, is a strengthener. It definitely doesn't weaken the argument.

Let's put it in simple terms:

Say I tell you:
People believe that solving Math maintains mental sharpness. But actually social interaction is enough. A study showed that people with more social activity have better mental skills.

Now, A says, " Mental skills were measured by checking language skills."
and B says, "Mental skills were measured by checking Math skills."

- who is strengthening my argument and who is weakening it?

A is weakening my argument since if mental skills were measured by language skills, obviously people with more social activity will report higher skills. It doesn't need to imply that social interactions lead to sharper mental skills. If all you are going to check is how well people can interact, the study will show that social people will have higher mental skills.

B strengthens my argument that social activity actually increases even the quantitative ability - which is probably one of the measures of mental skills. Hence, it does make my argument stronger that social activity is enough to improve mental skills - no matter how you measure mental skills.

Option (E) says what B says in my example. Hence it is not a weakener; it is, perhaps, a wee bit of a strengthener.

Agreed but it is strengthening the argument as a whole not the evidence which is a study that indicates more social contact -> more mental skills.
Option E is representing a flaw in the the evidence cited as it says that the study data was biased in the way that it had more 'math' data.
Before cause and effect relationship is analysed to determine a weakener should we not first assess the validity of the evidence? What am I missing?
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1262
Location: Malaysia
OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Apr 2017, 21:21
2
KUDOS
WillGetIt wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people-that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills-suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

Staying Sharp

Step 1: Identify the Question

The word weakens in the question stem indicates that this is a Weaken the Argument question.

Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument

Assump: intell activities nec to stay sharp w/ aging

BUT: study shows + social contact → + mental skills

© social contact is enough to stay sharp

Step 3: Pause and State the Goal

In a Weaken problem, the right answer will make the conclusion less likely to be correct. In this case, the right answer will suggest that social contact alone isn’t enough to maintain mental sharpness as one ages. It might suggest that the study’s conclusions were faulty, or that something else is needed in addition to social contact.

Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right

(A) This answer choice describes a suggestion that some people give to older people. The suggestion is based on a particular assumption: that older people need mental exercise in order to stay sharp. However, even though people buy into this assumption and even give advice based on it, it could still be incorrect. The well-meaning advisors could actually be basing their advice on incorrect information.

(B) CORRECT. The argument claims that social contact causes better mental skills. This might not actually be the case. If illness limits both social contact and mental acuity, then the study would be correct in noting that social contact is associated with better mental skills. However, it would be wrong to conclude that one causes the other, since a third factor—good health—actually causes both of them (i.e. healthy people are more likely to have strong mental sharpness and significant social interactions).

(C) This doesn’t weaken the link between social contact and mental sharpness. The answer choice doesn’t specify whether these proficient people are or aren’t mentally sharp. If they do maintain their mental sharpness, it could still be attributable to social contact, mental exercise, both, or neither. (Also, note that someone who is proficient in solving mathematical problems doesn’t necessarily solve math problems regularly.)

(D) This answer choice attacks the methods used by a study, rather than that study’s conclusions. Typically, as in this case, these answer choices are incorrect. The issue is that, only using the information in the argument and the answer choice, there’s no way to know whether studies that analyze data are less accurate than studies that collect original data. You may have personal beliefs about the matter, but the right answer to a Critical Reasoning problem will only ever use information found within the argument, with very few exceptions.

(E) The conclusion states that social contact improves mental skills. This could be true regardless of how mental skills are tested. Perhaps social contact improves performance on math problems.
_________________

"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”

"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."

Intern
Joined: 25 Feb 2017
Posts: 47
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.67
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Apr 2017, 23:45
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people-that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills-suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.
(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.
(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.
(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.
(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

IMO, B is the correct answer because if B is true, then participating in social interaction may now work in maintaining mental sharpness.
Manager
Status: active
Joined: 25 Jan 2016
Posts: 170
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 4
WE: Web Development (Computer Software)
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2017, 02:03
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people-that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills-suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

Its a typical causal relationship question just language makes it tricky
A causes B
A-more social contact
B-better mental skill

negate B
negate A
less social contact or isolation

negate B ---> negate A (This is logic of B)
so B-->A
hence a typical weakener .
BSchool Forum Moderator
Joined: 17 Jun 2016
Posts: 503
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.65
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 May 2017, 22:23
WillGetIt wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people-that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills-suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

Hit +Kudos, if you like this post.

who kept this in "95% tough" category !!!!
ofc its a tough one but not 95% i believe ...
_________________
Manager
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 223
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2017, 00:38
CR on gmat is different from CR on lsat.

is this problem from official guide?

pls, cite the source or we waiste our precious time
SVP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1860
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2017, 22:15
At first, I find B correct only after I take POE. It is true that in B, medical conditions are not discusses, and the connection between social contacts and mental sharpness is just a correlation, not causal relationship.
Then, I realize that the source is official guide gmat and the question STEM => B is correct because it weakens the premise, or the evidence.
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Posts: 360
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2017, 23:06
harishbiyani8888 wrote:
EMPOWERgmatMax wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people---that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills---suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

Type: Weaken
Boil It Down: Social interaction up -> Boost mental skills
Missing Information: There aren’t other factors
Goal: Find the option that shows that there could be another factor in play (de-link social interaction as a mental skills booster)
Analysis: This prompt sets up a classic causal argument (Social interaction up -> Boost mental skills). That means the reasoning assumes that there aren’t other factors in play. To weaken we need to select an option that either clouds the connection between social interaction and mental skills, or points to another factor altogether.

A) What happens as people grow older is an entirely separate subject. This question deals with a group of people in general, so zeroing in on a random sub-set, a specific niche within the overall group about what those people can do to stay sharp as they grow old is irrelevant. It’s Out Of Focus.

B) Yes. Here we’re presented with an entirely separate cause as to the correlation between social interaction and a boost in mental skills. If someone is suffering from a medical condition that impacts mental sharpness and that if the illness impacts the willingness to socialize, of course that would artificially boost the correlation between social interaction – and mental sharpness. It’s not fair to say that being more social is the cause of possessing greater mental skills then. This option brutalizes the reasoning in the argument.

C) If some people are strong at both, that could appears to be aligned with the argument that we’re asked to weaken since it shows the presence of both the cause and effect. However, it’s just not clear entirely clear how C either strengthens or weakens.

D) It’s not at all clear how analyzing data vs gathering and analyzing data from prior studies would weaken or strengthen. By itself, this option does nothing. Flawed data is a sucker choice on the GMAT. The GMAT doesn’t question the integrity of data. It questions the integrity of the reasoning interpreting the data.

E) This option attacks the wrong end of the causal relationship. We need an option that points to an alternative cause of a boost in mental skills (as in we need an option that shows that it’s not social interaction that boosts mental skills). This option just attempts to redefine how mental skill is defined by the study, and the option in NO way addresses the cause of the heightened mental skills. Instead, if this option had attacked the cause rather than the effect, then it would weaken too. For example, if it said: “The tasks defining social interaction compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to social interaction” then this option would then reveal that there is a totally different cause other than social interaction.

The key to understanding why option B weakens the argument requires paraphrasing the conclusion, and taking that paraphrase an extra step (and that’s the core reason why this question is up there on the difficulty spectrum):

The argument is essentially saying that social interaction boosts mental sharpness.

Paraphrased conclusion
That claim could be paraphrased to say: without social interaction, mental sharpness would be reduced.

Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

And since B) has a classic GMAT style double-negative, let's paraphrase B) too:
Many medical conditions and treatments that reduce mental sharpness also tend to reduce social interaction.

That means B) is saying:
Medical Conditions and TreatmentsMental Sharpness ⬇, Social Interaction ⬇.

So option B is introducing this Medical Conditions and Treatments alternative cause that impacts both social interaction and mental sharpness. So it's not that social ➧ mental, they go hand in hand attributable to another cause, thereby weakening the argument.

A tricky one! Definitely one of the trickiest of the new CRs in the 2016 OG, for sure.

Bigger GMAT Picture:
On tricky causal arguments, ACT/GMAC won’t just come out and say that it’s this other cause. That can be too obvious: for example, check out this low difficulty OG question with an obvious alternative cause: http://gmatclub.com/forum/in-the-last-d ... 36789.html

On tougher causal questions (like this Intellectual Activities question), ACT/GMAC will try to muddle the relationships with double negatives, or reversing the causality altogether.
For example: The food truck must have been successful because now they have a restaurant. Weakener: Well actually, the restaurant came first, and then they started operating the food truck.

So, if you're consistently scoring in the Verbal 40+ range, expect the causal arguments you see to involve that extra layer.

Hi i am still not able to understand why E is wrong... E is very tempting to mark. So in interpret E as.... the data compiled by study had some tasks for evaluating mental sharpness, and the tasks were more similar to mathematics problem than to conversation. So doesn't this weaken the evidence cited? Doesn't this prove that to maintain mental sharpness, social interaction is not necessary?

I believe B is correct due to the following - basically I tried to question or link it (maybe read every sentence and think, so what?) to the given conlc. that social interaction = increase in mental skills

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them. - generic statement, the language is similar as above but no link to the conclusion or the study

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation. Now if an aging person has illnesses like for ex: heart attacks/ Alzheimer's/ strokes in the brain or other issues whose DIRECT EFFECT is lack of speech or understanding/ general disorientation, how would they even manage regular social interaction? (This is what the conclusion recommends) So, how can you apply this lense of social interaction = mental skills to those can't be part of it, and incorrectly conclude that they aren't benefiting from it? Thus it directly attacks the argument's conclusion

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems. - Actually we aren't talking about 'many people'

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies. That's a distractor - how does it matter what type of data it is, if the conclusion won't change

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation. This would mean that study would talk more about those being good at math = mental skills, given the bias of sample collected

Hope this was helpful! Apologies on the depressing or extreme examples for B
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jun 2017
Posts: 439
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2017, 02:08
Clearly another reason is mentioned which lowers mental sharpness and increases isolation as well, contrary to Conclusion.
_________________

Give Kudos for correct answer and/or if you like the solution.

Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2016
Posts: 7
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2017, 00:13
@EmpowergmatMax

Hi EMPOWERgmatMax,

You paraphrased the conclusion to "without social interaction, mental sharpness would be reduced" but I have a doubt regarding how this can be done because is X ----> Y then (not X) may or may not lead to (not Y). Example if rains cause floods then no rain may or may not cause floods because there may be other reasons for the flooding.

Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2016
Posts: 7
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2017, 00:19
EMPOWERgmatMax wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people---that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills---suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

Type: Weaken
Boil It Down: Social interaction up -> Boost mental skills
Missing Information: There aren’t other factors
Goal: Find the option that shows that there could be another factor in play (de-link social interaction as a mental skills booster)
Analysis: This prompt sets up a classic causal argument (Social interaction up -> Boost mental skills). That means the reasoning assumes that there aren’t other factors in play. To weaken we need to select an option that either clouds the connection between social interaction and mental skills, or points to another factor altogether.

A) What happens as people grow older is an entirely separate subject. This question deals with a group of people in general, so zeroing in on a random sub-set, a specific niche within the overall group about what those people can do to stay sharp as they grow old is irrelevant. It’s Out Of Focus.

B) Yes. Here we’re presented with an entirely separate cause as to the correlation between social interaction and a boost in mental skills. If someone is suffering from a medical condition that impacts mental sharpness and that if the illness impacts the willingness to socialize, of course that would artificially boost the correlation between social interaction – and mental sharpness. It’s not fair to say that being more social is the cause of possessing greater mental skills then. This option brutalizes the reasoning in the argument.

C) If some people are strong at both, that could appears to be aligned with the argument that we’re asked to weaken since it shows the presence of both the cause and effect. However, it’s just not clear entirely clear how C either strengthens or weakens.

D) It’s not at all clear how analyzing data vs gathering and analyzing data from prior studies would weaken or strengthen. By itself, this option does nothing. Flawed data is a sucker choice on the GMAT. The GMAT doesn’t question the integrity of data. It questions the integrity of the reasoning interpreting the data.

E) This option attacks the wrong end of the causal relationship. We need an option that points to an alternative cause of a boost in mental skills (as in we need an option that shows that it’s not social interaction that boosts mental skills). This option just attempts to redefine how mental skill is defined by the study, and the option in NO way addresses the cause of the heightened mental skills. Instead, if this option had attacked the cause rather than the effect, then it would weaken too. For example, if it said: “The tasks defining social interaction compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to social interaction” then this option would then reveal that there is a totally different cause other than social interaction.

The key to understanding why option B weakens the argument requires paraphrasing the conclusion, and taking that paraphrase an extra step (and that’s the core reason why this question is up there on the difficulty spectrum):

The argument is essentially saying that social interaction boosts mental sharpness.

Paraphrased conclusion
That claim could be paraphrased to say: without social interaction, mental sharpness would be reduced.

Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

And since B) has a classic GMAT style double-negative, let's paraphrase B) too:
Many medical conditions and treatments that reduce mental sharpness also tend to reduce social interaction.

That means B) is saying:
Medical Conditions and TreatmentsMental Sharpness ⬇, Social Interaction ⬇.

So option B is introducing this Medical Conditions and Treatments alternative cause that impacts both social interaction and mental sharpness. So it's not that social ➧ mental, they go hand in hand attributable to another cause, thereby weakening the argument.

A tricky one! Definitely one of the trickiest of the new CRs in the 2016 OG, for sure.

Bigger GMAT Picture:
On tricky causal arguments, ACT/GMAC won’t just come out and say that it’s this other cause. That can be too obvious: for example, check out this low difficulty OG question with an obvious alternative cause:
On tougher causal questions (like this Intellectual Activities question), ACT/GMAC will try to muddle the relationships with double negatives, or reversing the causality altogether.
For example: The food truck must have been successful because now they have a restaurant. Weakener: Well actually, the restaurant came first, and then they started operating the food truck.

So, if you're consistently scoring in the Verbal 40+ range, expect the causal arguments you see to involve that extra layer.

Hi EMPOWERgmatMax,

You paraphrased the conclusion to "without social interaction, mental sharpness would be reduced" but I have a doubt regarding how this can be done because is X ----> Y then (not X) may or may not lead to (not Y). Example if rains cause floods then no rain may or may not cause floods because there may be other reasons for the flooding.

Manager
Joined: 05 Dec 2014
Posts: 212
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V36
GPA: 3.54
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2017, 22:58
hi, I understood that why B is correct, but i fail to understand that how option E supports the argument. Kindly help.
Manager
Joined: 05 Dec 2014
Posts: 212
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V36
GPA: 3.54
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2017, 23:03
EMPOWERgmatMax wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people---that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills---suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

Type: Weaken
Boil It Down: Social interaction up -> Boost mental skills
Missing Information: There aren’t other factors
Goal: Find the option that shows that there could be another factor in play (de-link social interaction as a mental skills booster)
Analysis: This prompt sets up a classic causal argument (Social interaction up -> Boost mental skills). That means the reasoning assumes that there aren’t other factors in play. To weaken we need to select an option that either clouds the connection between social interaction and mental skills, or points to another factor altogether.

A) What happens as people grow older is an entirely separate subject. This question deals with a group of people in general, so zeroing in on a random sub-set, a specific niche within the overall group about what those people can do to stay sharp as they grow old is irrelevant. It’s Out Of Focus.

B) Yes. Here we’re presented with an entirely separate cause as to the correlation between social interaction and a boost in mental skills. If someone is suffering from a medical condition that impacts mental sharpness and that if the illness impacts the willingness to socialize, of course that would artificially boost the correlation between social interaction – and mental sharpness. It’s not fair to say that being more social is the cause of possessing greater mental skills then. This option brutalizes the reasoning in the argument.

C) If some people are strong at both, that could appears to be aligned with the argument that we’re asked to weaken since it shows the presence of both the cause and effect. However, it’s just not clear entirely clear how C either strengthens or weakens.

D) It’s not at all clear how analyzing data vs gathering and analyzing data from prior studies would weaken or strengthen. By itself, this option does nothing. Flawed data is a sucker choice on the GMAT. The GMAT doesn’t question the integrity of data. It questions the integrity of the reasoning interpreting the data.

E) This option attacks the wrong end of the causal relationship. We need an option that points to an alternative cause of a boost in mental skills (as in we need an option that shows that it’s not social interaction that boosts mental skills). This option just attempts to redefine how mental skill is defined by the study, and the option in NO way addresses the cause of the heightened mental skills. Instead, if this option had attacked the cause rather than the effect, then it would weaken too. For example, if it said: “The tasks defining social interaction compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to social interaction” then this option would then reveal that there is a totally different cause other than social interaction.

The key to understanding why option B weakens the argument requires paraphrasing the conclusion, and taking that paraphrase an extra step (and that’s the core reason why this question is up there on the difficulty spectrum):

The argument is essentially saying that social interaction boosts mental sharpness.

Paraphrased conclusion
That claim could be paraphrased to say: without social interaction, mental sharpness would be reduced.

Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

And since B) has a classic GMAT style double-negative, let's paraphrase B) too:
Many medical conditions and treatments that reduce mental sharpness also tend to reduce social interaction.

That means B) is saying:
Medical Conditions and TreatmentsMental Sharpness ⬇, Social Interaction ⬇.

So option B is introducing this Medical Conditions and Treatments alternative cause that impacts both social interaction and mental sharpness. So it's not that social ➧ mental, they go hand in hand attributable to another cause, thereby weakening the argument.

A tricky one! Definitely one of the trickiest of the new CRs in the 2016 OG, for sure.

Bigger GMAT Picture:
On tricky causal arguments, ACT/GMAC won’t just come out and say that it’s this other cause. That can be too obvious: for example, check out this low difficulty OG question with an obvious alternative cause: http://gmatclub.com/forum/in-the-last-d ... 36789.html

On tougher causal questions (like this Intellectual Activities question), ACT/GMAC will try to muddle the relationships with double negatives, or reversing the causality altogether.
For example: The food truck must have been successful because now they have a restaurant. Weakener: Well actually, the restaurant came first, and then they started operating the food truck.

So, if you're consistently scoring in the Verbal 40+ range, expect the causal arguments you see to involve that extra layer.

Hi,
Thanks for the detailed explanation. Can you kindly explain that how option E supports the argument. I understood by your reasoning that why E is wrong but how does option E support the argument. I initially chose option E as the conclusion is made on the basis of the the study and the outcome of the study seems false and so the conclusion should be false. Kindly help
Re: OG 2016: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intell   [#permalink] 15 Nov 2017, 23:03

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 41 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by