Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 1912:30 PM EST
-01:30 PM EST
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
56% (01:54) correct
44%
(02:00)
wrong
based on 19630
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
OG16 SC110
001.jpg [ 46.3 KiB | Viewed 191828 times ]
002.jpg [ 73.23 KiB | Viewed 191808 times ]
003.jpg [ 50.43 KiB | Viewed 191678 times ]
004.jpg [ 44.25 KiB | Viewed 191492 times ]
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
OG16 SC110
Attachment:
001.jpg [ 46.3 KiB | Viewed 191828 times ]
Attachment:
002.jpg [ 73.23 KiB | Viewed 191808 times ]
Attachment:
003.jpg [ 50.43 KiB | Viewed 191678 times ]
Attachment:
004.jpg [ 44.25 KiB | Viewed 191492 times ]
14 May 2017, 22:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
This is one of the OG questions that causes the most trouble, partly because a lot of GMAT test-takers have an (occasionally incorrect) impulse to automatically eliminate any answer choice with the word "being."
But we'll get to that. Let's take these buggers in order:
That second "it" is the big problem here: "makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble..." I suppose that "it" could refer to "heavy commitment" or "course of action", but neither of those would make any sense. (A) is gone.
This is fairly subtle, but the subject doesn't make a whole lot of sense with the main verb here. "An executive... makes missing signs of incipient trouble... likely when they do appear." The pronoun "they" is OK, but it doesn't make logical sense to say that "an executive makes missing signs of trouble likely..." Also, I see no good reason use "ones" here -- in theory, "ones" would refer to very specific signs of trouble, and there's no good reason to use "ones" when a simple "them" would work. (B) is gone.
The "it" is a problem here: "it" generally refers to the nearest singular noun. In this case, "it" would seem to refer to "trouble," and that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. "Course of action" would work, but that's much farther back in the sentence.
To be fair, ambiguous pronouns aren't always wrong on the GMAT, so if you want to be conservative, you could keep (C) for now. But as we'll see in a moment, (E) is a much better option.
"Them" is trying to refer back to a possessive pronoun, "executives'", and that's wrong on the GMAT. Non-possessive pronouns (they, them, he, she, it) can't refer back to possessive nouns on the GMAT. So (D) is gone.
There are lots of pronoun issues in the other answer choices, but we're all good with (E): the ambiguous "it" we saw in (C) isn't here at all, and "them" and "they" very clearly refer to "signs of incipient trouble." The subject "being heavily committed to a course of action" works nicely with the main verb phrase ("is likely to make an executive miss signs of trouble..."), so (E) is an upgrade from (B).
That leaves "being" as the only reasonable objection to (E). But "being" is absolutely fine here: it's just a noun, also known as a gerund in this case. "Being" is no different than any other gerund. So (E) is our answer.
Please see last Monday's Topic of the Week for more on gerunds and other "-ing" words on the GMAT: https://gmatclub.com/forum/experts-topi ... 39780.html.
But we'll get to that. Let's take these buggers in order:
Quote:
That second "it" is the big problem here: "makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble..." I suppose that "it" could refer to "heavy commitment" or "course of action", but neither of those would make any sense. (A) is gone.
Quote:
This is fairly subtle, but the subject doesn't make a whole lot of sense with the main verb here. "An executive... makes missing signs of incipient trouble... likely when they do appear." The pronoun "they" is OK, but it doesn't make logical sense to say that "an executive makes missing signs of trouble likely..." Also, I see no good reason use "ones" here -- in theory, "ones" would refer to very specific signs of trouble, and there's no good reason to use "ones" when a simple "them" would work. (B) is gone.
Quote:
The "it" is a problem here: "it" generally refers to the nearest singular noun. In this case, "it" would seem to refer to "trouble," and that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. "Course of action" would work, but that's much farther back in the sentence.
To be fair, ambiguous pronouns aren't always wrong on the GMAT, so if you want to be conservative, you could keep (C) for now. But as we'll see in a moment, (E) is a much better option.
Quote:
"Them" is trying to refer back to a possessive pronoun, "executives'", and that's wrong on the GMAT. Non-possessive pronouns (they, them, he, she, it) can't refer back to possessive nouns on the GMAT. So (D) is gone.
Quote:
There are lots of pronoun issues in the other answer choices, but we're all good with (E): the ambiguous "it" we saw in (C) isn't here at all, and "them" and "they" very clearly refer to "signs of incipient trouble." The subject "being heavily committed to a course of action" works nicely with the main verb phrase ("is likely to make an executive miss signs of trouble..."), so (E) is an upgrade from (B).
That leaves "being" as the only reasonable objection to (E). But "being" is absolutely fine here: it's just a noun, also known as a gerund in this case. "Being" is no different than any other gerund. So (E) is our answer.
Please see last Monday's Topic of the Week for more on gerunds and other "-ing" words on the GMAT: https://gmatclub.com/forum/experts-topi ... 39780.html.
23 Mar 2019, 13:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hello Everyone!
Let's tackle this question, one problem at at time, and narrow it down to the correct choice! To begin, let's take a closer look at the original question, and highlight any major differences we spot in orange:
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
After a quick glance over the options, we have a few areas we can focus on. However, this is a question where the entire sentence is underlined, so we need to treat this differently than we do other questions! Whenever you see a question with the entire sentence underlined, there are a few areas you should pay attention to first to narrow down your options:
1. Modifiers
2. Parallelism
3. Meaning
4. Structure
Let's start with #3 on our list: meaning. There is also another glaring difference we see throughout each of the options: PRONOUNS! There are a LOT of pronouns in these sentences, so let's do a quick check to make sure all the pronouns have clear antecedents, and rule out any that don't:
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
first "it" = refers to "course of action" --> OK
second "it" = doesn't refer to anything, so we call this a "dummy pronoun" --> WRONG
"them" = refers to "signs of incipient trouble" --> OK
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
"one" = unclear; could refer to either "An executive" or "a course of action" --> WRONG
"ones" = misleading; changes meaning from referring to "signs of incipient trouble" to some other signs we haven't mentioned yet --> WRONG
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
"they" = unclear; could refer to "An executive," "a course of action," or "signs of incipient trouble" --> WRONG
"it" = refers back to "a course of action" --> OK
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
"it" = refers to "a course of action" --> OK
first "them" = refers to "Executives" --> WRONG (see below)
second "them" = refers to "signs" --> WRONG (see below)
So why are both "them" pronouns wrong? Because placing two of the same pronoun so close together is confusing to readers. It's too ambiguous which "them" is referring to which antecedent. Yes, you could do the hard work and figure it out, but reading shouldn't require the reader to do the heavy lifting.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
"one" = refers to "a course of action" --> OK
"them" = refers to "signs of incipient trouble" --> OK
Well there you have it - option E is the correct choice! It's the only sentence that used clear pronouns.
Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.
Let's tackle this question, one problem at at time, and narrow it down to the correct choice! To begin, let's take a closer look at the original question, and highlight any major differences we spot in orange:
Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
After a quick glance over the options, we have a few areas we can focus on. However, this is a question where the entire sentence is underlined, so we need to treat this differently than we do other questions! Whenever you see a question with the entire sentence underlined, there are a few areas you should pay attention to first to narrow down your options:
1. Modifiers
2. Parallelism
3. Meaning
4. Structure
Let's start with #3 on our list: meaning. There is also another glaring difference we see throughout each of the options: PRONOUNS! There are a LOT of pronouns in these sentences, so let's do a quick check to make sure all the pronouns have clear antecedents, and rule out any that don't:
A. Heavy commitment by an executive to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes it likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
first "it" = refers to "course of action" --> OK
second "it" = doesn't refer to anything, so we call this a "dummy pronoun" --> WRONG
"them" = refers to "signs of incipient trouble" --> OK
B. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that worked well in the past, makes missing signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting ones likely when they do appear.
"one" = unclear; could refer to either "An executive" or "a course of action" --> WRONG
"ones" = misleading; changes meaning from referring to "signs of incipient trouble" to some other signs we haven't mentioned yet --> WRONG
C. An executive who is heavily committed to a course of action is likely to miss or misinterpret signs of incipient trouble when they do appear, especially if it has worked well in the past.
"they" = unclear; could refer to "An executive," "a course of action," or "signs of incipient trouble" --> WRONG
"it" = refers back to "a course of action" --> OK
D. Executives' being heavily committed to a course of action, especially if it has worked well in the past, makes them likely to miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpreting them when they do appear.
"it" = refers to "a course of action" --> OK
first "them" = refers to "Executives" --> WRONG (see below)
second "them" = refers to "signs" --> WRONG (see below)
So why are both "them" pronouns wrong? Because placing two of the same pronoun so close together is confusing to readers. It's too ambiguous which "them" is referring to which antecedent. Yes, you could do the hard work and figure it out, but reading shouldn't require the reader to do the heavy lifting.
E. Being heavily committed to a course of action, especially one that has worked well in the past, is likely to make an executive miss signs of incipient trouble or misinterpret them when they do appear.
"one" = refers to "a course of action" --> OK
"them" = refers to "signs of incipient trouble" --> OK
Well there you have it - option E is the correct choice! It's the only sentence that used clear pronouns.
Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.
