GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 23 Aug 2019, 20:07

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 13 May 2014
Posts: 25
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jul 2018, 14:26
Took 2 minutes. Choice is c. Need to make “volunteers with moderate level” look good over “volunteers with highest levels of self esteem “


Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 11 Sep 2013
Posts: 138
Concentration: Finance, Finance
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Sep 2018, 11:01
When I was reading B, I thought that if he took anything granted, why was he even surveying? Even if he takes anything for granted, he will make a definite conclusion from the survey when it matches with his assumption. Since he didn't make a strong solid conclusion from the survey, I think he didn't take anything for granted.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Apr 2017
Posts: 31
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Oct 2018, 08:59
The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

A. It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.
even if peopl dont what the survey is for, it doesnot impact their answers

B. It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.
already the argumnt has mentioned that high esteem people took the test.

C. It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.
this could be possible

D. It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.
size of group is irrelevant

E. It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills
argument is concerned abt social skill and self esteem relationship, other things out of scope.
Director
Director
User avatar
V
Joined: 12 Feb 2015
Posts: 888
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Oct 2018, 05:25
1
Official Answer:

Argument Evaluation

Situation In a psychological study of 100 volunteers, those found to have the highest self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did those found to have moderate self-esteem.

Reasoning What is wrong with the psychologist citing the study’s results to justify the conclusion that exceptionally high self-esteem greatly improves social skills? The psychologist reasons that the study shows a correlation between very high self-esteem and how highly one rates one’s social skills, and that this correlation in turn suggests that very high self-esteem improves social skills. This argument is vulnerable to at least two criticisms: First, the argument assumes that the volunteers’ ratings of their own social skills are generally accurate. But very high self-esteem might in many cases result from a tendency to overestimate oneself and one’s skills, including one’s social skills. Second, the argument fails to address the possibility that good social skills promote high self-esteem rather than vice versa, as well as the possibility that some third factor (such as a sunny disposition or fortunate circumstances) promotes both high self-esteem and good social skills.

Quote:
A. It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.

A - An experiment’s subjects do not have to understand the experiment’s design in order for the experimental results to be accurate.

Quote:
B. It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

B - To the contrary, the argument concludes that the volunteers with the highest self-esteem attained their enhanced social skills as a result of attaining such high self-esteem.

Quote:
C. It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

C - Correct. - As explained above, very high self-esteem may often result from a tendency to overestimate oneself in general, and thus to overestimate one’s social skills.

Quote:
D. It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

D - A group of 100 volunteers is large enough for an experiment to provide at least a little support for at least some inferences regarding people in general.

Quote:
E. It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.

E - As explained above, the argument overlooks the possibility that some third factor may play a significant role in determining the strength of one’s social skills. But even if some factor other than self-esteem is more important in determining the strength of social skills, that would still be compatible with very high self-esteem being of some importance in improving one’s social skills.

The correct answer is C.
_________________
"Please hit :thumbup: +1 Kudos if you like this post" :student_man:

_________________
Manish :geek:

"Only I can change my life. No one can do it for me"
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 28 Jun 2018
Posts: 133
Location: Bouvet Island
GMAT 1: 490 Q39 V18
GMAT 2: 640 Q47 V30
GMAT 3: 670 Q50 V31
GMAT 4: 700 Q49 V36
GPA: 4
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Nov 2018, 04:53
1
Here is a simple explanation to all the folks confused with Option B -

GMATNinja as usual has given us an awesome explanation. I would like to add a few points to it!

Quote:
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.



Read the conclusion slowly " This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. "
The psychologists say that high self esteem improves the social skills.


Quote:
B. It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.


Now read option B slowly. In simple words it says "People with high self esteem already had better social skills (than other volunteers with low self esteem) even before they attained their highest level of self esteem."
Even if this were true it does not really make the argument vulnerable to criticism. Why?
Because even if they had better social skills earlier, there is still scope for improvement in their social skills which may be caused due to high levels of self esteem.
Even if volunteers with high self esteem had better social skills (than other volunteers with low self esteem) before they reached high levels of self esteem, it does not really make the argument vulnerable. Because it might be that these volunteers made their social skills even better than before. Which means they improved their social skills. Just what the conclusion says.

GMATNinja please let me know if my approach is 'vulnerable to criticism'.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2769
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Nov 2018, 10:35
1
blitzkriegxX wrote:
Here is a simple explanation to all the folks confused with Option B -

GMATNinja as usual has given us an awesome explanation. I would like to add a few points to it!

Quote:
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.



Read the conclusion slowly " This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. "
The psychologists say that high self esteem improves the social skills.


Quote:
B. It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.


Now read option B slowly. In simple words it says "People with high self esteem already had better social skills (than other volunteers with low self esteem) even before they attained their highest level of self esteem."
Even if this were true it does not really make the argument vulnerable to criticism. Why?
Because even if they had better social skills earlier, there is still scope for improvement in their social skills which may be caused due to high levels of self esteem.
Even if volunteers with high self esteem had better social skills (than other volunteers with low self esteem) before they reached high levels of self esteem, it does not really make the argument vulnerable. Because it might be that these volunteers made their social skills even better than before. Which means they improved their social skills. Just what the conclusion says.

GMATNinja please let me know if my approach is 'vulnerable to criticism'.

Sadly, I'm not sure that I follow your reasoning here. The psychologist suggests that higher self-esteem leads to improved social skills. Choice (B) says that social skills can be improved even in the absence of high self-esteem. That is, in fact, not just what the conclusion says.

So the more straightforward way to eliminate (B) is to recognize that this choice contradicts the entire premise of the study. The statement made in choice (B) is simply not part of the psychologist's argument. And if it's not part of the psychologists' argument, then it's not a vulnerability of the argument that we can criticize.

I hope this clarification helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 28 Jun 2018
Posts: 133
Location: Bouvet Island
GMAT 1: 490 Q39 V18
GMAT 2: 640 Q47 V30
GMAT 3: 670 Q50 V31
GMAT 4: 700 Q49 V36
GPA: 4
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Nov 2018, 11:30
GMATNinja wrote:
blitzkriegxX wrote:
Here is a simple explanation to all the folks confused with Option B -

GMATNinja as usual has given us an awesome explanation. I would like to add a few points to it!

Quote:
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.



Read the conclusion slowly " This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. "
The psychologists say that high self esteem improves the social skills.


Quote:
B. It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.


Now read option B slowly. In simple words it says "People with high self esteem already had better social skills (than other volunteers with low self esteem) even before they attained their highest level of self esteem."
Even if this were true it does not really make the argument vulnerable to criticism. Why?
Because even if they had better social skills earlier, there is still scope for improvement in their social skills which may be caused due to high levels of self esteem.
Even if volunteers with high self esteem had better social skills (than other volunteers with low self esteem) before they reached high levels of self esteem, it does not really make the argument vulnerable. Because it might be that these volunteers made their social skills even better than before. Which means they improved their social skills. Just what the conclusion says.

GMATNinja please let me know if my approach is 'vulnerable to criticism'.

Sadly, I'm not sure that I follow your reasoning here. The psychologist suggests that higher self-esteem leads to improved social skills. Choice (B) says that social skills can be improved even in the absence of high self-esteem. That is, in fact, not just what the conclusion says.

So the more straightforward way to eliminate (B) is to recognize that this choice contradicts the entire premise of the study. The statement made in choice (B) is simply not part of the psychologist's argument. And if it's not part of the psychologists' argument, then it's not a vulnerability of the argument that we can criticize.

I hope this clarification helps!


Hi GMATNinja
Thanks for your response! :)

However, I do not understand how you concluded that "option B
says that social skills can be *improved* even in the absence of high self-esteem."

I feel option B only states that - volunteers with high level self esteem already had high social skills before achieving that high self esteem level.

And my analysis is this - so what if they already had high social skills even before reaching high self esteem level?
This still doesn't effect the conclusion. Maybe after these volunteers reached high self esteem level, they further improved on the already high social skill level.

Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2769
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Dec 2018, 19:10
blitzkriegxX wrote:
gmatninja wrote:
Sadly, I'm not sure that I follow your reasoning here. The psychologist suggests that higher self-esteem leads to improved social skills. Choice (B) says that social skills can be improved even in the absence of high self-esteem. That is, in fact, not just what the conclusion says.

So the more straightforward way to eliminate (B) is to recognize that this choice contradicts the entire premise of the study. The statement made in choice (B) is simply not part of the psychologist's argument. And if it's not part of the psychologists' argument, then it's not a vulnerability of the argument that we can criticize.

I hope this clarification helps!


HiGMATNinja
Thanks for your response! :)

However, I do not understand how you concluded that "option B says that social skills can be *improved* even in the absence of high self-esteem."

I feel option B only states that - volunteers with high level self esteem already had high social skills before achieving that high self esteem level.

Hm, "improved" wasn't the best word choice on my part, because choice (B) implies that that social skills can be attained even in the absence of high self-esteem.

In other words, if group 1 (the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem) had better social skills even before they had high self-esteem, then they must have attained those social skills in the absence of high self-esteem. The key takeaway is that according to (B), high self-esteem was not required to attain better social skills.

I hope this eliminates any confusion I've caused!
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Aug 2018
Posts: 7
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jan 2019, 22:26
GMATNinja wrote:

Quote:
B. It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

The author's line of reasoning does not involve taking this assumption for granted. If anything, the author assumes something closer to the opposite (that those with high self esteem had worse social skills before attaining their high levels of self esteem. Since (B) is inaccurate, it cannot be grounds for criticizing the author's argument and can be eliminated.

Quote:
C. It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

What if volunteers with very high levels of self-esteem do tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills? In that case, the ratings those volunteers gave to describe their own social skills would be inaccurate, and we couldn't be sure which of the two groups (those with high levels of self-esteem and those with moderate levels of self-esteem) actually had better social skills. In other words, the ratings of the volunteers' social skills would not be reliable, so the ratings could not be used as valid evidence to support the author's conclusion. (C) looks pretty good.

Hopefully that adds some clarity!


Dear GMATNinja,

I selected C knowing it completely breaks the conclusion. But I was confused between B & C. Perhaps my understanding of Option B was incorrect, please do help me if thats the case, since the whole process of arriving at C was time consuming and I would like to improve that.

During pre-thinking I came up with 2 assumptions -
1) As mentioned in C
2) What if its the other way round - High Social Skills increase Self-Esteem

And it was the 2nd pre-thinking that got me stuck with option B, is it not talking about how this group already had greater self-esteem before attaining better social skills.
Now between option C & B, I rejected B by thinking - even if Greater Social Skills increases Self-Esteem, this option does not conclusively say that increase in self esteem does not improve Social Skills. Also, C breaks down the argument better than B.

Was my understanding of Option B correct? If so, my method of rejecting B was time consuming. Is there anyother way to look at this.
If my understanding was incorrect? What did this option exactly mean?
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2769
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2019, 14:04
Let's take another look at the answer choice:
Quote:
B. It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

This states that the conclusion takes for granted that the volunteers with high self-esteem had already attained better social skills. As we've explained in this post, this is just not true. So it can't be a weak point in the argument.

If you find yourself spinning you wheels, stop and read the question again. In this case we need to find how the argument is "most vulnerable to criticism," which is different than an answer choice that, if true, would weaken the argument. So, a more sound way to think through the passage is to look for weak points in how the conclusion was reached (which gets us to (C) quickly), rather than thinking of alternate explanations for the conclusion (which would get us stuck on (B)).

I hope this helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 04 Dec 2015
Posts: 121
WE: Operations (Commercial Banking)
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jun 2019, 13:02
Generally in CR questions, it is equally important to analyse the question stem.

The question stem clearly states , " The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

This means that we cannot change the basis or the data mentioned in the argument. The argument(made by the psychologist) considers a sample of 100 people sufficient enough to conduct an experiment ie. 100 people are solid enough to conclude what the psychologist has concluded. We cannot change that. Hence option D is incorrect

Also, the experiment/research mentioned in the argument considers social skill as the only parameter, we simply cannot change that. Why? again!, because the question stem says so. Hence Option E is incorrect.

Option A is purely irrelevant as it doesn't really affect the causality mentioned in the argument. It simply doesn't really impact the conclusion.

Option B is incorrect. So what if the volunteers already had decent social skills, even before the volunteers attained their high levels of self-esteem.. The argument is precisely about increasing the current level of self esteem. Also, if you look closely, option B lies within the same causality framework as the conclusion. Hence incorrect.

We are left with Option C and that obviously is the answer. As per my analysis, the reason option C is absolutely fine is that it states an Alternate effect, another way to weaken an argument ie. people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills

AjiteshArun GMATNinja is my analysis okay? Please comment. Also, the way i have eliminated option B is correct???

i look forward to hearing from you guys.

Best Regards,
Adit
CEO
CEO
User avatar
V
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 2970
Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jun 2019, 06:55
Hi Adit,

Your analysis is correct.

aditliverpoolfc wrote:
Option A is purely irrelevant as it doesn't really affect the causality mentioned in the argument. It simply doesn't really impact the conclusion.
Yes. We have no reason to think that the study was inaccurate just because many of the volunteers did not understand what the questionnaire was designed to measure.

aditliverpoolfc wrote:
Option B is incorrect. So what if the volunteers already had decent social skills, even before the volunteers attained their high levels of self-esteem.. The argument is precisely about increasing the current level of self esteem. Also, if you look closely, option B lies within the same causality framework as the conclusion. Hence incorrect.
Correct. The psychologist concludes that attaining a very high level of self-esteem leads to better social skills (self-esteem → social skills), so the assumption that better "social skills" were there even before "an exceptionally high level of self-esteem" was never made.

aditliverpoolfc wrote:
We are left with Option C and that obviously is the answer. As per my analysis, the reason option C is absolutely fine is that it states an Alternate effect, another way to weaken an argument ie. people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills
Yes. If they don't have a good idea about how good their social skills are, then we can't rely on the findings of the study.
_________________
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 31 Jan 2019
Posts: 76
Concentration: General Management
GPA: 3.9
CAT Tests
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Aug 2019, 01:44
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.

The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

Pre-thinking:
Here we have a cause-effect relation where:
Cause: self esteem
Effect: improvement of social skills
Our tsk here is to weaken this relation and that can be done in several ways. One way is the "no cause, still effect". Let's say that one or two people interviewed would report levels of social skills as high or higher than the ones with the highest self esteem (note that I used "reported and not ranked here). In this case the relation would be weakened.
Another weakener could be the following: because of the high level of self esteem people tend to overrate their social skills.
Let's now analyze the answer choices.


(A) It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.
People understanding of what is measured is irrelevant to the argument. Hence incorrect

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.
The fact that self esteem levels or social skills level may have varied before the questionnaire is irrelevant to the argument. Hence incorrect

(C) It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.
This is in line with our pre-thinking. Hence correct.

(D) It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.
The size of the experiment is irrelevant to the argument. Hence incorrect

(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.
The argument is focused on a specific relation. The fact that there might be other factors to influence social skills, whether true or false, is out of the scope here. Hence incorrect
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi   [#permalink] 07 Aug 2019, 01:44

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 33 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne