Psychology professor: Considering the novelty and richness

Question

Psychology professor: Considering the novelty and richness of the first several years of life, it is perhaps surprising that adults have so few early childhood recollections. Only from the age of 5 or 6 do most people begin to accumulate reasonably clear and explicit memories, mainly because that is when we go to school and begin to develop an organized structure for our lives, a structure that allows us to better encode episodes for later retrieval.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the explanation the professor proposes?

(A) Adults who regularly attended preschool classes before the age of 5 do not have significantly more memories from that period of their lives than adults who did not regularly attend preschool classes.

(B) Adults who as children regularly watched educational television programs have significantly more early childhood memories than adults who did not regularly watch educational television.

(C) In a recent study, 95 percent of the participants questioned were able to recall an incident that occurred prior to school age.

(D) In a recent study, 80 percent of the participants questioned were unable to give details of a single verifiable incident from their first year of formal schooling.

(E) Studies show that the earlier children learn to read, the better able they are to recall childhood incidents.

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-1bludf3n.png [ 112.68 KiB | Viewed 4558 times ]

Show Answer

Official Answer

A

Question exposed a gap? Take sectional Adaptive Quant, Verbal, or DI tests on GMAT Club and review the detailed score report. Get started →

MartyMurray · Accepted Answer

Psychology professor: Considering the novelty and richness of the first several years of life, it is perhaps surprising that adults have so few early childhood recollections. Only from the age of 5 or 6 do most people begin to accumulate reasonably clear and explicit memories, mainly because that is when we go to school and begin to develop an organized structure for our lives, a structure that allows us to better encode episodes for later retrieval.

Though the professor's conclusion is not marked with a conclusion marker, we see that the professor has used the word "because" to present a cause-effect conclusion. That conclusion is basically the following:

Going to school and developing an organized structure for their lives causes people to begin to accumulate reasonably clear and explicit memories at age 5 or 6.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the explanation the professor proposes?

To answer this question correctly, we must find a choice that casts doubt on the professor's conclusion.

(A) Adults who regularly attended preschool classes before the age of 5 do not have significantly more memories from that period of their lives than adults who did not regularly attend preschool classes.

The professor's explanation is basically that the reason people don't have clear memories of events they experienced before age 5 or 6 is that they weren't going to school. In other words, the professor's conclusion is that going to school is the cause of clear recollections.

So, this choice undermines the professor's explanation by showing that, even when people go to school before age 5, they don't have clear memories of events they experienced before that age.

In other words, this choice shows that there are situations in which the cause, school, is present, but the effect, clear recollections, is not present.

Thus, this choice shows that going to school may not be the cause of clear recollections beginning at age 5 or 6 because when school is present before age 5, it doesn't cause clear recollection, giving us reason to believe that something other than going to school is the cause of clear recollection beginning at age 5 or 6.

Keep.

(B) Adults who as children regularly watched educational television programs have significantly more early childhood memories than adults who did not regularly watch educational television.

This choice may seem to bring up an alternative cause for children beginning to remember, watching educational television programs. However, this choice doesn't really change the scenario. It just adds another dimension to it.

We still have the fact that adults "have so few early childhood recollections" and the explanation that developing an organized structure for their lives causes people to begin to accumulate reasonably clear and explicit memories at age 5 or 6.

The fact that watching educational television causes people to have  more  early childhood memories doesn't undermine that explanation for people's  beginning  to remember things clearly at a particular age.

Eliminate.

(C) In a recent study, 95 percent of the participants questioned were able to recall an incident that occurred prior to school age.

Notice that the passage has stated as fact the following:

it is perhaps surprising that adults have so few early childhood recollections. Only from the age of 5 or 6 do most people begin to accumulate reasonably clear and explicit memories

This choice may seem to contradict that fact, but actually, what the passage says could still be true even if most people can "recall an incident that occurred prior to school age." After all, recalling one incident is not in conflict with having "few early childhood recollections."

Also, the professor is seeking to explain why "adults have so few early childhood recollections," and the fact that people generally remember an incident that occurred prior to when they were of school age does not cast doubt on the professor's explanation for that fact.

Eliminate.

(D) In a recent study, 80 percent of the participants questioned were unable to give details of a single verifiable incident from their first year of formal schooling.

This choice doesn't really change what we know. Regardless of what this choice says, it's still the case that people's clear recollections of their lives begin around when they start going to school. They may not be able to give details of incidents from their first year of schooling, but they "begin to accumulate reasonably clear and explicit memories" at that age.

Eliminate.

(E) Studies show that the earlier children learn to read, the better able they are to recall childhood incidents.

This choice doesn't conflict with the professor's explanation. After all, while this choice may be true, it's still true that most people's relatively clear memories begin around when they start going to school.

Sure, learning to read can have an effect on how well people recall childhood incidents, but that fact doesn't mean that the structure of going to school isn't what causes people to begin remembering what they experience.

We could get the impression that this choice presents learning to read as an alternative cause of people's beginning to recollect what they have experienced, but notice that this choice is not about learning to read causing people to  begin  to recollect events. It's about learning to read causing people to recollect  better . So, this choice indicates that learning to read is the cause of something different, remembering better, from what going to school causes, beginning to remember.

Eliminate.

Correct Answer   A

SnorLax_7 · Answer

Hi  MartyTargetTestPrep ,  MartyMurray

My prethinking led me to Option A but when I saw 'do not have  significantly  more memories', I outrightly rejected A considering that they have some memories compared to other.
In CR, Adverb/Adjective do play a major role so where did I go wrong ? Kindly help

Thanks !

MartyMurray · Answer

Indeed, we have to be super careful with adjectives in CR. So, let's consider what effect the use of the adverb "significantly" has in this context.

Something that is significant is something that matters or is worthy of attention.

So, if they do not have "significantly more" memories, then what we know is that they either have no more memories of the period of their lives before age 5 or they don't have sufficiently more memories that the difference is worth paying attention to.

Thus, what (A) says indicates that, as a practical matter, people who go to preschool before age 5 don't have more memories than anyone else.

In general, in GMAT CR, "significantly" is used to communicate that there is a difference that matters or that we should pay attention to, and "not significantly" is used to communicate that any difference there may be is too small to indicate anything that matters.

SnorLax_7 · Answer

Thank you so much  MartyMurray  for the detailed explanation.

SergejK · Answer

MartyMurray  Thank you for your detailed explanation. I got the question correct, however, going over the question a second time I realised that it's not easy to identify the conclusion here. Usually, when a cause is presented, it is usually there to support the conclusion. At least that is how I learned it. Please, correct me if I am wrong. That the children ages 5-6 accumulate clear memories is presented as a premise and not as part of the conclusion. There is nothing pointing to the fact that a conclusion is drawn here. So the conclusion indicator could be "mainly" but mainly is not probably, which would clearly indicate an opinion. And given that a cause is presented for something that I didn't consider to be part of the conclusion, I feel like a clear conclusion is missing here. Could you help me understand where I failed with my text analysis?

PS: Going over the text repeatedly, I see that the cause-effect relationship could be considered a conclusion. However, it could be also part of the premise. Is the process here that as all other parts of the passage can clearly be eliminated as conclusion and as we are asked to weaken the conclusion, the only thing that can be interpreted as one is the cause-effect relationship so that due to the lack of better alternatives we use this part as conclusion? Probably that is how I answered the question correctly.

PPS: As the question asks how to weaken the  explanation  of the professor, could that be an indicator that we should zone in on this cause-effect part and not to look for a conclusion? I really have trouble accepting that as conclusion, partly because we are not allowed to attack the premise so I really would like to understand how to clearly deferentiate premise from conclusion, as in my opinion, the cause-effect relationship has all the markers of a premise.

MartyMurray · Answer

The fact that "Only from the age of 5 or 6 do most people begin to accumulate reasonably clear and explicit memories," is not really presented as a premise. It's more a fact that the professor then explains.

So, there aren't really any premises that support the conclusion.
 
Notice that the question stem is "Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the  explanation  the professor proposes?"

So, to find what we need to weaken the case for, we need to find an explanation proposed by the professor.

The only explanation is "mainly because that is when we go to school and begin to develop an organized structure for our lives, a structure that allows us to better encode episodes for later retrieval."

So, it must be the case that we have to find a reason to doubt that explanation.
 
It cannot be a premise because it doesn't support anything else, and it is an explanation. So, it must be what we have to cast doubt on.

Raman109 · Answer

Psychology professor: Considering the novelty and richness of the first several years of life, it is perhaps surprising that adults have so few early childhood recollections. - Fact

Only from the age of 5 or 6 do most people begin to accumulate reasonably clear and explicit memories, mainly because that is when we go to school and begin to develop an organized structure for our lives, a structure that allows us to better encode episodes for later retrieval. - Fact + Conclusion. So basically when they start to have the organized structure, that structure allows us to better encode episodes.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the explanation the professor proposes?

(A) Adults who regularly attended preschool classes before the age of 5 do not have significantly more memories from that period of their lives than adults who did not regularly attend preschool classes. - If "preschool" vs "school" threw you off, you are not alone. In the US a preschool can be day care or so which can be $2000 per month and school is school starting from Kindergarten which is basically free as we pay taxes. But if we keep the logic to the "organized structure in our lives" which one can start getting in the day care/preschool as well, then it makes sense. - ok.

(B) Adults who as children regularly watched educational television programs have significantly more early childhood memories than adults who did not regularly watch educational television. - Irrelevant.

(C) In a recent study, 95 percent of the participants questioned were able to recall an incident that occurred prior to school age. - Does't challenge. no.

(D) In a recent study, 80 percent of the participants questioned were unable to give details of a single verifiable incident from their first year of formal schooling. - slight weakener, but if we consider preschool/school as same in option A, that becomes a stronger weakener.

(E) Studies show that the earlier children learn to read, the better able they are to recall childhood incidents. - strengthener.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

Psychology professor: Considering the novelty and richness

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Psychology professor: Considering the novelty and richness

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards