It is currently 17 Feb 2018, 17:02

### 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

# People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 07 Mar 2012
Posts: 51
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Nonprofit
GMAT Date: 09-13-2013
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2013, 07:53
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

92% (01:13) correct 8% (01:26) wrong based on 1390 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition
Practice Question
Question No.: 3
Page: 117
Difficulty:

People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by having television sets, when on, send out low-level electromagnetic waves that are reflected back to the sets. The reflected waves could then be analyzed to determine how many persons are within the viewing area of the sets. Critics fear adverse health effects of such a monitoring system, but a proponent responds, "The average dose of radiation is less than one chest x-ray. As they watch, viewers won't feel a thing."

Which of the following issues would it be most important to resolve in evaluating the dispute concerning the health effects of the proposed system?

A.Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can distinguish between people and pets
B.Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation
C.Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various areas of the country or in a single area only
D.What uses are foreseen for the viewership data
E.Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Remember that potential unused turns into pain. So dedicate yourself to expressing your best.

Last edited by dentobizz on 21 Oct 2013, 20:59, edited 1 time in total.
Formatting for verbal review project
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4680
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2013, 10:17
7
KUDOS
Expert's post
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by having television sets, when on, send out low-level electromagnetic waves that are reflected back to the sets. The reflected waves could then be analyzed to determine how many persons are within the viewing area of the sets. Critics fear adverse health effects of such a monitoring system, but a proponent responds, "The average dose of radiation is less than one chest x-ray. As they watch, viewers won't feel a thing."

Which of the following issues would it be most important to resolve in evaluating the dispute concerning the health effects of the proposed system?

A.Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can distinguish between people and pets
B.Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation
C.Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various areas of the country or in a single area only
D.What uses are foreseen for the viewership data
E.Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose

I'm happy to help. This is a great question.

First of all, you may find this blog, on Evaluate the Argument CR questions, helpful:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-criti ... onclusion/

Keep in mind, one the traps on this question format --- often, there are a few issues floating around in the argument, and the prompt question asks us to focus only on one. Therefore, anything related to the other issues, while relevant to the argument overall, is not relevant specifically to the issue on which the prompt question zeroes in. Here, one such issue would be the larger question --- would this design effectively and accurately measure how many people are watching TV? That would be relevant in the larger sense, but it's completely irrelevant to the prompt question, which very specifically is focused on health effects. Without even looking at the answers, I could predict that one or more incorrect answers would address the measurement issue.

A. Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can distinguish between people and pets
Relevant to the large issue of --- would this measure things accurately? --- but not relevant to health effects. This is incorrect.

B. Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation
An interesting analogy, but radar detectors hit cars, which presumably blocks most of the radiation from hitting the human body of the driver/passengers, whereas these TV zapper things will be shot right at the people sitting there. This is not particularly helpful, so it is incorrect.

C. Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various areas of the country or in a single area only
More data is always good, but suppose we had a literal answer to this --- "Yes, tried in various areas" or "No, only in a single area" --- if we just had that information, that answer, it wouldn't necessarily tell us anything. This is incorrect.

D. What uses are foreseen for the viewership data
This touches on juicy issues of civil liberties and government monitoring of private information, all of which could play into the larger discussion of whether this system would be legal or morally correct or consistent with the US Constitution, but none of these are relevant to the health effects. This is incorrect.

E. Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose
Ah, this one is relevant to the health effects. First of all, a single chest X-ray is a wallop of radiation ----- if folks get more than, say, two in a year, that's too much. If each session of watching TV with this zapper system is equivalent to a single chest X-ray dose, that would be bad enough, but if each session of watching TV were a lifetime's dose of X-rays, then it would be absolutely frying the poor TV viewers. This one is highly relevant to health effects, so this is the correct answer.

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Director
Status: Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 17 Apr 2013
Posts: 590
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GMAT 2: 750 Q51 V41
GMAT 3: 790 Q51 V49
GPA: 3.3
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2014, 14:02
mikemcgarry wrote:
People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by having television sets, when on, send out low-level electromagnetic waves that are reflected back to the sets. The reflected waves could then be analyzed to determine how many persons are within the viewing area of the sets. Critics fear adverse health effects of such a monitoring system, but a proponent responds, "The average dose of radiation is less than one chest x-ray. As they watch, viewers won't feel a thing."

Which of the following issues would it be most important to resolve in evaluating the dispute concerning the health effects of the proposed system?

A.Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can distinguish between people and pets
B.Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation
C.Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various areas of the country or in a single area only
D.What uses are foreseen for the viewership data
E.Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose

I'm happy to help. This is a great question.

First of all, you may find this blog, on Evaluate the Argument CR questions, helpful:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-criti ... onclusion/

Keep in mind, one the traps on this question format --- often, there are a few issues floating around in the argument, and the prompt question asks us to focus only on one. Therefore, anything related to the other issues, while relevant to the argument overall, is not relevant specifically to the issue on which the prompt question zeroes in. Here, one such issue would be the larger question --- would this design effectively and accurately measure how many people are watching TV? That would be relevant in the larger sense, but it's completely irrelevant to the prompt question, which very specifically is focused on health effects. Without even looking at the answers, I could predict that one or more incorrect answers would address the measurement issue.

A. Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can distinguish between people and pets
Relevant to the large issue of --- would this measure things accurately? --- but not relevant to health effects. This is incorrect.

B. Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation
An interesting analogy, but radar detectors hit cars, which presumably blocks most of the radiation from hitting the human body of the driver/passengers, whereas these TV zapper things will be shot right at the people sitting there. This is not particularly helpful, so it is incorrect.

C. Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various areas of the country or in a single area only
More data is always good, but suppose we had a literal answer to this --- "Yes, tried in various areas" or "No, only in a single area" --- if we just had that information, that answer, it wouldn't necessarily tell us anything. This is incorrect.

D. What uses are foreseen for the viewership data
This touches on juicy issues of civil liberties and government monitoring of private information, all of which could play into the larger discussion of whether this system would be legal or morally correct or consistent with the US Constitution, but none of these are relevant to the health effects. This is incorrect.

E. Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose
Ah, this one is relevant to the health effects. First of all, a single chest X-ray is a wallop of radiation ----- if folks get more than, say, two in a year, that's too much. If each session of watching TV with this zapper system is equivalent to a single chest X-ray dose, that would be bad enough, but if each session of watching TV were a lifetime's dose of X-rays, then it would be absolutely frying the poor TV viewers. This one is highly relevant to health effects, so this is the correct answer.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Yes Mike it is an Excellent explanation. Thanks for helping us. Cheers!
_________________

Like my post Send me a Kudos It is a Good manner.
My Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-score-750-and-750-i-moved-from-710-to-189016.html

Director
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 584
Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2015, 09:16
(E) is the only answer choice that contains relevant Iformation about Health issues... all other answer choices don't have even a small portion regarding the health issues. Spent 45 sec on this one.
_________________

When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10318
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Mar 2016, 02:49
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.
Senior Manager
Joined: 23 Apr 2015
Posts: 330
Location: United States
WE: Engineering (Consulting)
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Aug 2016, 08:50
E.Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose

This is the only choice that links with dose and health hazard, rests dont.
Intern
Joined: 16 Jan 2018
Posts: 21
GMAT 1: 600 Q40 V33
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2018, 17:48
mikemcgarry wrote:
People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by having television sets, when on, send out low-level electromagnetic waves that are reflected back to the sets. The reflected waves could then be analyzed to determine how many persons are within the viewing area of the sets. Critics fear adverse health effects of such a monitoring system, but a proponent responds, "The average dose of radiation is less than one chest x-ray. As they watch, viewers won't feel a thing."

Which of the following issues would it be most important to resolve in evaluating the dispute concerning the health effects of the proposed system?

A.Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can distinguish between people and pets
B.Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation
C.Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various areas of the country or in a single area only
D.What uses are foreseen for the viewership data
E.Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose

I'm happy to help. This is a great question.

First of all, you may find this blog, on Evaluate the Argument CR questions, helpful:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-criti ... onclusion/

Keep in mind, one the traps on this question format --- often, there are a few issues floating around in the argument, and the prompt question asks us to focus only on one. Therefore, anything related to the other issues, while relevant to the argument overall, is not relevant specifically to the issue on which the prompt question zeroes in. Here, one such issue would be the larger question --- would this design effectively and accurately measure how many people are watching TV? That would be relevant in the larger sense, but it's completely irrelevant to the prompt question, which very specifically is focused on health effects. Without even looking at the answers, I could predict that one or more incorrect answers would address the measurement issue.

A. Whether the proposed method of monitoring viewership can distinguish between people and pets
Relevant to the large issue of --- would this measure things accurately? --- but not relevant to health effects. This is incorrect.

B. Whether radar speed monitors also operate on the principle of analyzing reflected waves of electromagnetic radiation
An interesting analogy, but radar detectors hit cars, which presumably blocks most of the radiation from hitting the human body of the driver/passengers, whereas these TV zapper things will be shot right at the people sitting there. This is not particularly helpful, so it is incorrect.

C. Whether the proposed system has been tried out in various areas of the country or in a single area only
More data is always good, but suppose we had a literal answer to this --- "Yes, tried in various areas" or "No, only in a single area" --- if we just had that information, that answer, it wouldn't necessarily tell us anything. This is incorrect.

D. What uses are foreseen for the viewership data
This touches on juicy issues of civil liberties and government monitoring of private information, all of which could play into the larger discussion of whether this system would be legal or morally correct or consistent with the US Constitution, but none of these are relevant to the health effects. This is incorrect.

E. Whether the average dose that the proponent describes is a short-term dose or a lifetime cumulative dose
Ah, this one is relevant to the health effects. First of all, a single chest X-ray is a wallop of radiation ----- if folks get more than, say, two in a year, that's too much. If each session of watching TV with this zapper system is equivalent to a single chest X-ray dose, that would be bad enough, but if each session of watching TV were a lifetime's dose of X-rays, then it would be absolutely frying the poor TV viewers. This one is highly relevant to health effects, so this is the correct answer.

Does all this make sense?
Mike

I mistakenly choose (D) as it was my aha moment, did not even read (E) carefully.
I took it as paradox question and read the quote as "the average dose of a radiation is less than one chest x ray and therefore was looking for an answer that resolved the discrepancy of the dosage amount. Looking at D , i thought if we know the tv viewing usage then we know the total radiation one is exposed to which can help resolve the dispute!

Now,I see that they did not say "average does of *ONE* radiation..

Where else did i go wrong? any suggestions please?
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4680
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2018, 16:00
krish76 wrote:
I mistakenly choose (D) as it was my aha moment, did not even read (E) carefully.
I took it as paradox question and read the quote as "the average dose of a radiation is less than one chest x ray and therefore was looking for an answer that resolved the discrepancy of the dosage amount. Looking at D , i thought if we know the tv viewing usage then we know the total radiation one is exposed to which can help resolve the dispute!

Now,I see that they did not say "average does of *ONE* radiation..

Where else did i go wrong? any suggestions please?

Dear krish76,

I'm happy to respond.

Like all official CR questions, this one is tricky and has well-designed traps.

First of all, always make sure to read all answer choices. What seems good may be a good distractor.

Second, it's helpful to keep in mind that general knowledge about the world is always helpful. See:
GMAT Critical Reasoning and Outside Knowledge

Finally, the best way to improve one's understand of arguments is by developing a habit of reading, because in the business news, one will see real world arguments everyday. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

Does all this make sense?
Mike
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Intern
Joined: 16 Jan 2018
Posts: 21
GMAT 1: 600 Q40 V33
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Feb 2018, 17:39
mikemcgarry wrote:
krish76 wrote:
I mistakenly choose (D) as it was my aha moment, did not even read (E) carefully.
I took it as paradox question and read the quote as "the average dose of a radiation is less than one chest x ray and therefore was looking for an answer that resolved the discrepancy of the dosage amount. Looking at D , i thought if we know the tv viewing usage then we know the total radiation one is exposed to which can help resolve the dispute!

Now,I see that they did not say "average does of *ONE* radiation..

Where else did i go wrong? any suggestions please?

Dear krish76,

I'm happy to respond.

Like all official CR questions, this one is tricky and has well-designed traps.

First of all, always make sure to read all answer choices. What seems good may be a good distractor.

Second, it's helpful to keep in mind that general knowledge about the world is always helpful. See:
GMAT Critical Reasoning and Outside Knowledge

Finally, the best way to improve one's understand of arguments is by developing a habit of reading, because in the business news, one will see real world arguments everyday. See:
How to Improve Your GMAT Verbal Score

Does all this make sense?
Mike

Thank you Mike. Yes, It absolutely does. I have been trying to incorporate some reading (mostly economist) after taking my first GMAT test. And the fact that you are atleast expected to apply some basic outside knowledge is totally new to me!!
As far as i my answer choice goes for this question, I think i fell for the trap this answer choice was made more. Will be more careful going forward.
Re: People's television-viewing habits could be monitored by hav   [#permalink] 01 Feb 2018, 17:39
Display posts from previous: Sort by