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

 It is currently 23 Oct 2018, 02:45

GMAT Club Daily Prep

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

Customized
for You

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

Track

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

Practice
Pays

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

Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1183
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new  [#permalink]

Show Tags

19 Aug 2012, 01:02
siddharthasingh wrote:
MacFauz wrote:
siddharthasingh wrote:
Why not E?
This option says that was no RELIABLE EVIDENCE that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test. I suppose correct diagnosis and reliable evidence are both quite analogous to each other. If there were a reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young, then how could the autistic children can benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.
Please let me know if I am missing something.

Statement E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test.

Negating we would get : There was some reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test. We can still argue that the new technique would provide better evidence. The negation hence does not actively kill the conclusion. Hence E cannot be the answer.

Even if ,on negating, we get: There was some reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test,
then also reliable evidence means some way through which it could have been ensured that whether a particular child was autistic or not. And if this was so, then how could the conclusion hold true.

The conclusion is : Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

So I can still argue that this new technique would help in diagnosis earlier than when that reliable evidence could be obtained. The negation should completely destroy the conclusion without any room for counter argument.

On negating B we get : A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis may not provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions.

Hence this negation kills the conclusion by stating that the test is not a reliable one.

And on a general note, it is better to stay close to the argument. "reliable evidence" unnecessarily widens the scope from the focus of the argument which is "the diagnostic test"
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1169
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new  [#permalink]

Show Tags

19 Aug 2012, 01:26
But if there was a reliable evidence, of any type, then the children would have been benefitted earlier itself.
I agree that its rather better to stay close to the wordings of the stimulus rather than broaden the scope of it, but going with what the argument intends to say( .......a new test that for the first time CORRECTLY diagnoses autism....), but if there existed some reliable evidence , then autistic children could have benefitted much earlier.
_________________
Intern
Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 49
Re: Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new  [#permalink]

Show Tags

30 Jan 2014, 11:35
is this question in the 500 level ????? i don't think so
Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 299
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new  [#permalink]

Show Tags

31 Jan 2014, 07:54
Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnosesautism in children as young as 18 months old. When used to evaluate 16,000 children at their 18-month checkup, the test correctly diagnosed all 10 children later confirmed to be autistic, though it also wrongly identified 2 children as autistic. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the reporter's argument depends?

A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised....incorrect.... the stimulus says none existed which could accurately diagnose....not that could diagnose...

B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions.correct.. If Autistic children can now benefit much earlier in life than before despite few wrong reports ....this statement is correct.

C) The new test can be used to evaluate all children. regardless of the level of development of their verbal skillsonly autistic children considered in argument ... not all.

D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children...we cant say that.....may/ may not be true.....

E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test.irrelevant...

Current Student
Joined: 05 Apr 2015
Posts: 393
Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new  [#permalink]

Show Tags

17 May 2015, 23:42
semwal wrote:
Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnosesautism in children as young as 18 months old. When used to evaluate 16,000 children at their 18-month checkup, the test correctly diagnosed all 10 children later confirmed to be autistic, though it also wrongly identified 2 children as autistic. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the reporter's argument depends?

A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised....incorrect.... the stimulus says none existed which could accurately diagnose....not that could diagnose...

B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions.correct.. If Autistic children can now benefit much earlier in life than before despite few wrong reports ....this statement is correct.

C) The new test can be used to evaluate all children. regardless of the level of development of their verbal skillsonly autistic children considered in argument ... not all.

D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children...we cant say that.....may/ may not be true.....

E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test.irrelevant...

Hi,

I am unable to comprehend why B should be the answer for this reason:

Conclusion:Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

The question is not about the certainity/quality of the results of the test as per the conclusion. Its about a test that can deliver some results(how much accurate it is takes a backseat) at a fairly advanced stage.

Only option A comes out good since if there was a test already available to detect at that early an age.. people will take it rather than this test.

Experts pls help.

Thanks in advance and thanks to the people who posted already.. Still I am clueless.

Dom.
Intern
Joined: 02 Aug 2015
Posts: 5
Re: Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new  [#permalink]

Show Tags

05 Jul 2016, 15:09
dominicraj wrote:
semwal wrote:
Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new test that for the first time accurately diagnosesautism in children as young as 18 months old. When used to evaluate 16,000 children at their 18-month checkup, the test correctly diagnosed all 10 children later confirmed to be autistic, though it also wrongly identified 2 children as autistic. Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the reporter's argument depends?

A) No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised....incorrect.... the stimulus says none existed which could accurately diagnose....not that could diagnose...

B) A diagnostic test that sometimes falsely gives a positive diagnosis can still provide a reasonable basis for treatment decisions.correct.. If Autistic children can now benefit much earlier in life than before despite few wrong reports ....this statement is correct.

C) The new test can be used to evaluate all children. regardless of the level of development of their verbal skillsonly autistic children considered in argument ... not all.

D) Those children incorrectly identified as autistic will not be adversely affected by treatments aimed at helping autistic children...we cant say that.....may/ may not be true.....

E) There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test.irrelevant...

Hi,

I am unable to comprehend why B should be the answer for this reason:

Conclusion:Autistic children can therefore now benefit much earlier in life than before from the treatments already available.

The question is not about the certainity/quality of the results of the test as per the conclusion. Its about a test that can deliver some results(how much accurate it is takes a backseat) at a fairly advanced stage.

Only option A comes out good since if there was a test already available to detect at that early an age.. people will take it rather than this test.

Experts pls help.

Thanks in advance and thanks to the people who posted already.. Still I am clueless.

Dom.

This is LSAT question as in Manhattan forum. THough could be done by negation.
Manager
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Posts: 117
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Technology
Re: Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new  [#permalink]

Show Tags

05 Jul 2016, 21:23
This is one is definitely B.

Answer choice A takes it way too far as to state 'No test intended for diagnosing autism at such an early age existed before the new test was devised.' but the conclusion doesn't go that far.

Answer choice C also takes it too far as to state 'The new test can be used to evaluate all children. regardless of the level of development of their verbal skills.' and actually is irrelevant because nothing has been stated about verbal skills at all.

Answer choice E, again similar to A takes it way too far, it is unknown if "There was no reliable evidence that autism could affect children so young until the advent of the new test." It could very well be true that there was reliable evidence however it isn't as effective as the new test.

Answer choice D is trap answer because it makes it out to seem that the conclusion misses out on the false positives (those that did not have autism but the test stated that they do). However the conclusion does not even mention those children as the basis of the conclusion therefore it is actually irrelevant.

Answer choice B, while I still don't like it is one that is definitely conservative with the word, 'sometimes' however as stated some of the posters above, it does discredit the false negatives so that there is less worries about that case.

Therefore, I went with answer choice B.
smashzone, what is the source of the problem?
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 3229
Re: Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new  [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Aug 2018, 05:08
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
Re: Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new &nbs [#permalink] 01 Aug 2018, 05:08

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 28 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by