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

It is currently 14 Oct 2019, 08:47

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 
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Status: I don't stop when I'm Tired,I stop when I'm done
Joined: 11 May 2014
Posts: 526
Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Finance, Leadership
GPA: 2.81
WE: Business Development (Real Estate)
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jun 2017, 13:03
13
Top Contributor
80
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

64% (01:51) correct 36% (02:12) wrong based on 2766 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review 2018
Practice Question
Critical Reasoning
Question no. 182

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?

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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 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.

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

(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.

(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.

(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.

(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.

_________________
Md. Abdur Rakib

Please Press +1 Kudos,If it helps
Sentence Correction-Collection of Ron Purewal's "elliptical construction/analogies" for SC Challenges
Most Helpful Expert Reply
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2856
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 13 Jul 2017, 20:38
36
15
Thanks for all of the great replies! It looks like there is still some confusion surrounding this question, so let's try to break it down...

The conclusion is that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." In other words, attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem will CAUSE a great improvement in one's social skills. How does the author arrive at that conclusion?

  • 100 volunteers take a psychological questionnaire to measure their self-esteem.
  • Each volunteer is also asked to rate his or her own social skills. Note that their self-esteem was MEASURED by the questionnaire while their social skills were rated by the volunteers themselves.
  • Based on the results of the questionnaire, the psychologists could break up the 100 volunteers into groups, including those with the highest levels of self-esteem and those with moderate levels of self esteem.
  • Now the psychologists could compare the SELF-RATED social skills of those two groups: "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."

Based on that evidence, the author concludes that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem would greatly improve one's social skills. Why is this argument vulnerable to criticism?

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.

All that matters is that the test did in fact measure self-esteem, regardless of whether the volunteers understood what the questionnaire was designed to measure. Choice (A) can be eliminated.

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.

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.

Pay attention to the word choice in the last sentence: "This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." The author does not say the evidence proves or confirms this conclusion. Thus, the author implicitly acknowledges that it is only a small sample. Regardless, evidence from a small sample can certainly suggest whether a certain theory is true. In other words, the evidence from the group of 100 volunteers certainly supports the author's conclusion, so (D) is not a valid criticism.

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.

The author does not argue that self-esteem is the only factor or even the most important factor affecting the strength of one's social skills. The author simply argues that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." This argument could still hold even if there were several other factors that had a greater impact on the strength of one's self-esteem. (E) can be eliminated.

Hopefully that adds some clarity!
_________________
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 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

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.
General Discussion
Current Student
User avatar
P
Joined: 18 Aug 2016
Posts: 612
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 740 Q51 V38
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jun 2017, 03:40
1
AbdurRakib wrote:
The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review 2018
Practice Question
Critical Reasoning
Question no. 182

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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.


Although i chose D but after knowing the OA i feel C was the better answer. D was close.
_________________
We must try to achieve the best within us


Thanks
Luckisnoexcuse
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Jun 2017
Posts: 6
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jun 2017, 21:44
2
1
this is interesting
the key to succeed on CR (for evaluate, weaken, strengthen, flaw, assumption question) is ability to criticize the argument before going to answer choices. this is call prethinking on e gmat course.

after practicing a few problems, we realize some flaw and begin know how to criticize.
I think there are two way to criticize:
1. is logic of argument is good
2. is the presenting of evidence is good

this is causal argument and we normally criticize by thinking that there is another cause or causal relation is reversed.

but we can thinking of presenting of evidence . is it good?

choice C match this prethinking. the presenting of evidence is not good. C is correct

with the mind of criticization and with two way of looking at argument, looking at logic and at presenting of evidence , we are armed and powered before going to answer choices.
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 581
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, International Business
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V38
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Reviews Badge
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jun 2017, 01:20
mbahanoi wrote:
this is interesting
the key to succeed on CR (for evaluate, weaken, strengthen, flaw, assumption question) is ability to criticize the argument before going to answer choices. this is call prethinking on e gmat course.

after practicing a few problems, we realize some flaw and begin know how to criticize.
I think there are two way to criticize:
1. is logic of argument is good
2. is the presenting of evidence is good

this is causal argument and we normally criticize by thinking that there is another cause or causal relation is reversed.

but we can thinking of presenting of evidence . is it good?

choice C match this prethinking. the presenting of evidence is not good. C is correct

with the mind of criticization and with two way of looking at argument, looking at logic and at presenting of evidence , we are armed and powered before going to answer choices.


So basically you are showing that logical gap criticizing is better than data invalidation . i.e. Here, you are saying The survey as a whole cannot give data of general public is wrong , which i say it is data invalidation type of criticizing. While, C says that The method of approach was wrong.
Am still not convinced that how C is better than D. I prefer both C and D are best options.
daagh Sir, GMATNinja, Can you please explain me how C bests over C. As both seem to be best criticizers.
Thank you.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 18 Mar 2015
Posts: 117
Location: India
Schools: ISB '19
GMAT 1: 600 Q47 V26
GPA: 3.59
Reviews Badge
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jul 2017, 20:31
mbahanoi wrote:

So basically you are showing that logical gap criticizing is better than data invalidation . i.e. Here, you are saying The survey as a whole cannot give data of general public is wrong , which i say it is data invalidation type of criticizing. While, C says that The method of approach was wrong.
Am still not convinced that how C is better than D. I prefer both C and D are best options.
daagh Sir, GMATNinja, Can you please explain me how C bests over C. As both seem to be best criticizers.
Thank you.


me too stuck between C and D ? ..need explanation please
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 04 Jan 2017
Posts: 1
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jul 2017, 13:35
Hi Experts,

I am very confused in Option C n E.
How can we assume that Survey is Flawed or Inflated (option C) ?

However, I know Arguemnt is based on Causality. and I have option E, which says it overlooks the possibility that there can be something(Third thing) which caused High Socila skills ?

Please explain....
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2018
Posts: 1
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Mar 2018, 08:33
I am having trouble seeing why (b) isn't equally as acceptable as (c).

When reading this problem, C&B instantly stood out. Could someone help explain the flaw in my logic:

Psychologist: "This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one's social skills."

(b) it takes for granted that the volunteers with highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills that did the other volunteers, even before the former
volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.


If this were true, wouldn't this also make the psychologist argument of: attaining high level of self-esteem greatly improves one social's skills
inadequate?

Bc (b) states that the high social skills predated their high self esteem, therefore high self-esteem can't greatly improve one's social skills, since the respondents had high social skills prior to obtaining high self-esteem.

I see (b) if true negating the cause-effect argument bc it completely flips around the cause-effect.

I'm sure there is a hole in my logic, I would greatly appreciate somebody pointing it out.

Thank you
Senior PS Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: It always seems impossible until it's done.
Joined: 16 Sep 2016
Posts: 737
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
GMAT 2: 770 Q51 V42
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Mar 2018, 08:50
xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I am having trouble seeing why (b) isn't equally as acceptable as (c).

When reading this problem, C&B instantly stood out. Could someone help explain the flaw in my logic:

Psychologist: "This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one's social skills."

(b) it takes for granted that the volunteers with highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills that did the other volunteers, even before the former
volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.


If this were true, wouldn't this also make the psychologist argument of: attaining high level of self-esteem greatly improves one social's skills
inadequate?

Bc (b) states that the high social skills predated their high self esteem, therefore high self-esteem can't greatly improve one's social skills, since the respondents had high social skills prior to obtaining high self-esteem.

I see (b) if true negating the cause-effect argument bc it completely flips around the cause-effect.

I'm sure there is a hole in my logic, I would greatly appreciate somebody pointing it out.

Thank you


Responses inline.

B) States that : " 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 highlighted part is not true - the volunteers first gave a questionnaire regarding self esteem followed by asking to rate their own social skills... also it is not making the argument weaker.

C) clearly makes the argument weaker. If the high self esteem is making people blind to their low social skills - we would get multiple false positives and the argument does not hold.

Hope this helped...
_________________
Regards,
Gladi



“Do. Or do not. There is no try.” - Yoda (The Empire Strikes Back)
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 28 Aug 2016
Posts: 164
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 May 2018, 10:59
1
xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I am having trouble seeing why (b) isn't equally as acceptable as (c).

When reading this problem, C&B instantly stood out. Could someone help explain the flaw in my logic:

Psychologist: "This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one's social skills."

(b) it takes for granted that the volunteers with highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills that did the other volunteers, even before the former
volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.


If this were true, wouldn't this also make the psychologist argument of: attaining high level of self-esteem greatly improves one social's skills
inadequate?

Bc (b) states that the high social skills predated their high self esteem, therefore high self-esteem can't greatly improve one's social skills, since the respondents had high social skills prior to obtaining high self-esteem.

I see (b) if true negating the cause-effect argument bc it completely flips around the cause-effect.

I'm sure there is a hole in my logic, I would greatly appreciate somebody pointing it out.

Thank you



I think its more about the "taking it for granted" part. If that answer had not included "taking it for granted", it would have very likely become the right answer.

But here the answer is saying that argument RELIED on that assumption, when it did not.
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 26 Dec 2017
Posts: 149
Reviews Badge
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 May 2018, 07:38
I did not understand the meaning of option B.
Can any one pls explain.
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.
_________________
--If you like my post pls give kudos
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Dec 2017
Posts: 15
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 May 2018, 08:57
I am inclined towards 'B' and need suggestion to clear my doubt, according to me 'B' can be seen as reversal of cause and effect ie, high esteem is the result of social skills as people with the highest level of self esteem had better social skills even before attaining high levels of self esteem
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2856
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 23 May 2018, 21:31
3
kunalkhanna wrote:
I am inclined towards 'B' and need suggestion to clear my doubt, according to me 'B' can be seen as reversal of cause and effect ie, high esteem is the result of social skills as people with the highest level of self esteem had better social skills even before attaining high levels of self esteem

kunalkhanna and tejyr, the psychologist suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. In other words, a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills.

Choice (B), on the other hand, implies that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem already had better social skills, even before they had attained their high levels of self-esteem ("the former volunteers" simply refers to "the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem").

But this is not consistent with the argument. If they already had better social skills, that would weaken the idea that a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills (since the social skills were already good). So (B) should be eliminated.

Check out this post for a more complete explanation.

I hope that 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 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

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.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Status: Turning my handicaps into assets
Joined: 09 Apr 2017
Posts: 122
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 May 2018, 04:10
GMATNinja wrote:
Thanks for all of the great replies! It looks like there is still some confusion surrounding this question, so let's try to break it down...

The conclusion is that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." In other words, attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem will CAUSE a great improvement in one's social skills. How does the author arrive at that conclusion?

  • 100 volunteers take a psychological questionnaire to measure their self-esteem.
  • Each volunteer is also asked to rate his or her own social skills. Note that their self-esteem was MEASURED by the questionnaire while their social skills were rated by the volunteers themselves.
  • Based on the results of the questionnaire, the psychologists could break up the 100 volunteers into groups, including those with the highest levels of self-esteem and those with moderate levels of self esteem.
  • Now the psychologists could compare the SELF-RATED social skills of those two groups: "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."

Based on that evidence, the author concludes that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem would greatly improve one's social skills. Why is this argument vulnerable to criticism?

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.

All that matters is that the test did in fact measure self-esteem, regardless of whether the volunteers understood what the questionnaire was designed to measure. Choice (A) can be eliminated.

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.

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.

Pay attention to the word choice in the last sentence: "This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." The author does not say the evidence proves or confirms this conclusion. Thus, the author implicitly acknowledges that it is only a small sample. Regardless, evidence from a small sample can certainly suggest whether a certain theory is true. In other words, the evidence from the group of 100 volunteers certainly supports the author's conclusion, so (D) is not a valid criticism.

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.

The author does not argue that self-esteem is the only factor or even the most important factor affecting the strength of one's social skills. The author simply argues that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." This argument could still hold even if there were several other factors that had a greater impact on the strength of one's self-esteem. (E) can be eliminated.

Hopefully that adds some clarity!



Dear GMATNinja,

I have a doubt on C. Even if the researchers overlooked the possibility that people with high self-esteem sometimes are not aware of their own social skills, wouldn't they see that from the results of the two questonnaires, since first one is created by the researches and thus its result is considered reliable? I mean wouldn't they see that those with high self-esteem rating sometimes didn't rated themselves as having strong social skills? Isn't there a possibility that researches DID actually observed such a rare occasions in high self-esteem owners (according to researchers' first questionnaire), but as this occasions was rare they still concluded that having high self esteem greatly improves social skills?

I hope I could communicate my reasoning clearly :roll:
_________________
If time was on my side, I'd still have none to waste......
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2856
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 01 Jun 2018, 21:42
Mehemmed wrote:
GMATNinja wrote:
Thanks for all of the great replies! It looks like there is still some confusion surrounding this question, so let's try to break it down...

The conclusion is that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." In other words, attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem will CAUSE a great improvement in one's social skills. How does the author arrive at that conclusion?

  • 100 volunteers take a psychological questionnaire to measure their self-esteem.
  • Each volunteer is also asked to rate his or her own social skills. Note that their self-esteem was MEASURED by the questionnaire while their social skills were rated by the volunteers themselves.
  • Based on the results of the questionnaire, the psychologists could break up the 100 volunteers into groups, including those with the highest levels of self-esteem and those with moderate levels of self esteem.
  • Now the psychologists could compare the SELF-RATED social skills of those two groups: "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."

Based on that evidence, the author concludes that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem would greatly improve one's social skills. Why is this argument vulnerable to criticism?

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.

All that matters is that the test did in fact measure self-esteem, regardless of whether the volunteers understood what the questionnaire was designed to measure. Choice (A) can be eliminated.

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.

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.

Pay attention to the word choice in the last sentence: "This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." The author does not say the evidence proves or confirms this conclusion. Thus, the author implicitly acknowledges that it is only a small sample. Regardless, evidence from a small sample can certainly suggest whether a certain theory is true. In other words, the evidence from the group of 100 volunteers certainly supports the author's conclusion, so (D) is not a valid criticism.

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.

The author does not argue that self-esteem is the only factor or even the most important factor affecting the strength of one's social skills. The author simply argues that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." This argument could still hold even if there were several other factors that had a greater impact on the strength of one's self-esteem. (E) can be eliminated.

Hopefully that adds some clarity!



Dear GMATNinja,

I have a doubt on C. Even if the researchers overlooked the possibility that people with high self-esteem sometimes are not aware of their own social skills, wouldn't they see that from the results of the two questonnaires, since first one is created by the researches and thus its result is considered reliable? I mean wouldn't they see that those with high self-esteem rating sometimes didn't rated themselves as having strong social skills? Isn't there a possibility that researches DID actually observed such a rare occasions in high self-esteem owners (according to researchers' first questionnaire), but as this occasions was rare they still concluded that having high self esteem greatly improves social skills?

I hope I could communicate my reasoning clearly :roll:

We are looking for something that explains why the psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism. This is not the same as looking for something that completely disproves the psychologist's argument. Sure, the psychologist's conclusion might still be correct. But how does the psychologist arrive at that conclusion?

The argument is based on the evidence that "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." Sure, it is POSSIBLE that, based on the data, researchers realized 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.

But regardless of whether they noticed this trend, this fact would hurt the evidence. Does that mean that the conclusion is wrong? Maybe, maybe not... perhaps the researchers were still able to use the data to determine that there is a relationship between self-esteem and social skills.

Either way, (C) describes why the specific evidence used in the argument is not reliable. Additional information/evidence could perhaps strengthen the conclusion, but (C) explains why the psychologist's logic is vulnerable to criticism.
_________________
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 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

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.
IIMA, IIMC School Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 04 Sep 2016
Posts: 1366
Location: India
WE: Engineering (Other)
CAT Tests
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Jun 2018, 23:17
GMATNinja generis VeritasPrepKarishma

Does not the phrase - this suggests that - acts as an inference?

On GMAT RC, we usually have : the lines (x to y) suggests that ...
We look forward for something that must be true from the highlighted lines in the passage.

Do not we MUST 100% believe in author when he terms - the evidence suggests that - after citing an evidence?

Also I see a huge logical jump between volunteers assessing their self-esteem and psychologist assessing volunteers' self esteem based on the question asked after the questionnaire. Since in CR arguments, I am concerned with author' opinion and not how volunteers reacted to questionnaire (which also in a way casts doubt on main premise and is not allowed) can I safely discard (A) using this rationale?

Looking forward for your two cents.
_________________
It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.

Feeling stressed, you are not alone!!
VP
VP
User avatar
D
Joined: 09 Mar 2016
Posts: 1230
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jun 2018, 09:07
GMATNinja wrote:
kunalkhanna wrote:
I am inclined towards 'B' and need suggestion to clear my doubt, according to me 'B' can be seen as reversal of cause and effect ie, high esteem is the result of social skills as people with the highest level of self esteem had better social skills even before attaining high levels of self esteem

kunalkhanna and tejyr, the psychologist suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. In other words, a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills.

Choice (B), on the other hand, implies that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem already had better social skills, even before they had attained their high levels of self-esteem ("the former volunteers" simply refers to "the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem").

But this is not consistent with the argument. If they already had better social skills, that would weaken the idea that a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills (since the social skills were already good). So (B) should be eliminated.

Check out this post for a more complete explanation.

I hope that helps!



hi there GMATNinja :)

"vulnurebale to critisism" doesnt it mean "to weaken " ? i understood the question that we needed to weaken and chose B :) can you bring some clarity between

"vulnurebale to critisism" VS "to weaken "

thank you :-)
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 16 May 2016
Posts: 199
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: ESSEC '21 (A$)
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.5
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jun 2018, 11:32
D is incorrect since although we are relying on small size of sample space, the way of conducting survey and concluding it takes bigger part in wrong analysis of reasoning than size of sample space. Even though results from small sample space 'cannot' be relied completely, wrong results(interpretation) 'are' not trusted. Here argument wrongly considers the other way round of overestimating one's self which is explained in option C

Sent from my XT1562 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
_________________
Not Giving UP! Kudos if you like the question :)
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Jan 2017
Posts: 31
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jul 2018, 07:12
GMATNinja wrote:
kunalkhanna wrote:
I am inclined towards 'B' and need suggestion to clear my doubt, according to me 'B' can be seen as reversal of cause and effect ie, high esteem is the result of social skills as people with the highest level of self esteem had better social skills even before attaining high levels of self esteem

kunalkhanna and tejyr, the psychologist suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. In other words, a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills.

Choice (B), on the other hand, implies that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem already had better social skills, even before they had attained their high levels of self-esteem ("the former volunteers" simply refers to "the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem").

But this is not consistent with the argument. If they already had better social skills, that would weaken the idea that a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills (since the social skills were already good). So (B) should be eliminated.

Check out this post for a more complete explanation.

I hope that helps!



Hey!

But the question itself asks us to select an option that weakens the conclusion, doesn't it?. This made me pick B(cause-effect)

Thanks,
Uma
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2856
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 12 Jul 2018, 11:32
6
dave13 wrote:
GMATNinja wrote:
kunalkhanna wrote:
I am inclined towards 'B' and need suggestion to clear my doubt, according to me 'B' can be seen as reversal of cause and effect ie, high esteem is the result of social skills as people with the highest level of self esteem had better social skills even before attaining high levels of self esteem

kunalkhanna and tejyr, the psychologist suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. In other words, a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills.

Choice (B), on the other hand, implies that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem already had better social skills, even before they had attained their high levels of self-esteem ("the former volunteers" simply refers to "the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem").

But this is not consistent with the argument. If they already had better social skills, that would weaken the idea that a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills (since the social skills were already good). So (B) should be eliminated.

Check out this post for a more complete explanation.

I hope that helps!



hi there GMATNinja :)

"vulnurebale to critisism" doesnt it mean "to weaken " ? i understood the question that we needed to weaken and chose B :) can you bring some clarity between

"vulnurebale to critisism" VS "to weaken "

thank you :-)

Good question, dave13!

Identifying why an argument is most vulnerable to criticism is not quite the same as weakening an argument. Consider the following example:

    Jack eats lots of fatty foods. Jack has high cholesterol. Therefore, Jack has high cholesterol because he eats fatty foods.

First, let's think of a couple ways to weaken this argument:

  • "Nutritionist: The fatty foods in Jack's diet are low in the type of fat that causes high cholesterol." - Even though Jack eats fatty foods, the fats in those foods do NOT cause high cholesterol. This suggests that the high cholesterol is caused by some other factor(s).
  • "Both of Jack's parents have high cholesterol even though neither eats a lot of fatty foods." - This suggests that Jack's high cholesterol is related to genetics, not diet.

Have we proven that the argument is wrong? No, but each statement provides evidence that weakens the argument.

Switching gears, why is this argument vulnerable to criticism? Because it overlooks the possibility that Jack's high cholesterol is caused by other factor(s). Notice that this statement does not directly weaken the argument. Instead, it simply points out a flaw in the logic.

The same is true of choice (C). If we were told 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.", that statement would directly weaken the argument. Instead, choice (C) simply mentions this as a possibility.

To summarize, identifying why an argument is vulnerable to criticism is basically pointing out a gap in the logic. Weakening an argument involves providing new information/evidence that works against the argument in the passage.

I hope that 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 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

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.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi   [#permalink] 12 Jul 2018, 11:32

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 35 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