|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
05 Aug 2021, 23:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
81% (01:29) correct
19%
(01:36)
wrong
based on 280
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Research into information pollution—a term popularized by web usability experts—have determined that the impact of disruptive information pollutants such as unsolicited electronic messages (spam) is less than that caused by information overload due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
A) have determined that the impact of disruptive information pollutants such as unsolicited electronic messages (spam) is less than that caused by
B) has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants like unsolicited electronic messages (spam) is less than that of
C) has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants such as unsolicited electronic messages (spam) is less than
D) has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants such as unsolicited electronic messages (spam) is less than that of
E) had determined that the impact of disruptive information pollutants such as unsolicited electronic messages (spam) is less than
05 Aug 2021, 23:31
Kudos
Bookmarks
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
THE PROMPT
• What is the thing between the em dashes?
An appositive. It refers to and clarifies what is meant by information pollution.
The subject of the clause is still research.
• due to
→ can be replaced sensibly by caused by
→ modifies information overload
→ information overload is a noun.
I realize that overload may look like a verb. In this case, the word is a noun.
See the footnote.
→ due to is not a decision point.
Please, if you have not yet thought about the issue, do not waste any time on it.
THE OPTIONS
The singular subject research requires the singular verb has determined.
• strange meaning and horrible diction (word choice and placement)
→ What does it mean to say that "the impact of spam is LESS than the impact of information overload"?
The impact is less? Less impactful? Ugh. Less forceful? Less damaging.
→ Diction: The writers mean to say less harmful. They should do so.
ELIMINATE A
→ Like is used to compare nouns.
→ Such as is used to introduce examples.
In the context of introducing examples, some experts believe that this distinction between such as and like may cease to exist fairly soon.
I am dubious about such claims; the persistent presence of one official question leads me to believe that the distinction will hold.
Do be flexible. If you find that the last answer standing uses like to introduce examples, and you are sure that the other four errors contain clear error, then choose that seemingly defective last answer.
On the other hand, do not go looking for trouble. As you will see in my Notes, the OE writer in the OG VR 2022 relies on the distinction between such as and like to eliminate answer choices.
See Notes, below.
Finally, in the context of introducing examples, like will not be better than such as.
If you are leery about rejecting what might be an acceptable construction, keep B and look for a better answer.
ELIMINATE B
→ Option C erroneously compares damage caused by disruptive information pollutants to . . . information overload
→ Rethink the logic of the language: the damage caused by spam cannot be compared straightaway to information overload, but rather to damage caused by information overload.
ELIMINATE C
• singular subject research correctly takes the singular verb, has
• comparison is correct and parallel
→ damage caused by disruptive info pollutants is compared to damage [THAT OF] caused by social media-generated information overload.
KEEP (and if you've been holding onto B, now is the time to dump it and scratch B off)
→ no reason exists to use past perfect.
Past perfect typically indicates the earlier of two past (finished!) events.
• wrong comparison - the impact of disruptive information is erroneously compared directly to information overload.
We need a comparison between disruptive information caused by spam and disruptive information caused by social media.
ELIMINATE E
The answer is D.
NOTES
-- introducing examples: like or such as?
This issue is somewhat contentious.
A couple of official questions use "like" in the non-underlined portion of the question.
[Sidebar. An aspirant has no way to know this fact, but do not rely on prose in CR and RC as examples of GMAC's position on any SC issues.]
TAKEAWAYS:
• Such as is correct
• like may be correct at some point soon
• LIKE is not better than SUCH AS
-- As far as I know, no correct official answer choice has ever used like to introduce examples.
-- The use of such as to introduce examples has never been wrong.
-- The use of like to introduce examples is not better than such as.
Like may well soon be as acceptable as such as, but like will not be better than such as—
unless, of course, GMAC suddenly gets populated by a bunch of Chomsky fanatics, in which case SC will disappear anyway.
Many people believe that GMAC will soon abandon this preference for such as.
Before I saw OG VR 2020, 2021, and 2022 I would have agreed.
I thought that one question would disappear from OG VR 2020. It did not.
The question explicitly tests such as and like to introduce examples, although both incorrect options that use like have an additional error.
The question did not disappear from OG VR 2020. You can find it in OG VR 2022. It has been around since at least 2015.
Its official explanation states:
The preferred way to introduce examples is with the phrase "such as," rather than with the word "like," which suggests a comparison.
Spoiler alert: two incorrect answers to an official question are revealed
In the context of introducing examples, like will not be better than such as.
COMMENTS
chrisjonatan , welcome to SC Butler.
poojapandav95 , chrisjonatan , I have bumped you both to Best Community Reply. (The bumped posts will not show up in any particular order.)
New aspirants and those of you who might be shy: all aspirants have a standing invitation to post on SC Butler.
The best way to learn is to participate and to explain.
If you can explain something, you will soar on test day when you see the issue.
thelonghalloween , yes, almost always, to determine whether due to is correct, replace that phrase with caused by or attributable to.
If the replacement makes sense, then due to is almost certainly correct.
If the replacement does not make sense, then due to is incorrect, and we probably need because of or because.
This substitution works 90 percent of the time.
To see a couple more ways to decide whether due to is correct (when replacing it with "caused by" does not create obvious disaster), see my post and explanation by clicking here.
As thelonghalloween notes, due to answers "what" questions and modifies nouns, but never verbs or clauses.
(Do not worry if you did not think about this issue.
Due to was not a decision point.
The phrase appears in the nonunderlined portion. A few people got interested.)
There are two (three? it's late) other answers that were very close to Best Community Reply.
In the midst of a very strange and challenging world at the moment,
you all display what it takes to beat this test: show up. Try. Engage.
Kudos go to everyone tonight.
Keep up the hard work.
DUE TO in information overload due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
Overload is a noun. Due to modifies nouns.
What caused the overload? Answer: the proliferation of social media platforms.
The overload was due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
Due to is not adverbial in this sentence.
zhanbo , watch. I can turn that phrase into a relative clause and then a reduced relative clause.
Only nouns get described by relative clauses.
→ Relative clause, an adjectival modifier of the noun overload:
Research into information pollution . . . has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants such as spam is less than that of information overload that is due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
With the relative clause fully written out, the sentence is clunkier than before.
So we will reduce the relative clause:
Remove the relative pronoun (that). Remove the to be verb (is). Leave the adjective.
Now we have a reduced relative clause, which is still an adjectival modifier of the noun overload
Research into information pollution . . . has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants such as spam is less than that of information overload due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
Is this sentence elegant?
No. I have spent many years as an editor and writer, among other things.
The way that GMAC writers craft these SC questions is ingenious—and almost inimitable.
Try. Write a sentence correction question. Doing so is incredibly difficult.
I can appreciate clever testing of issues and still think that most of the correct sentences do not constitute great prose.
I do not believe that it is fruitful to nitpick.
If nitpicking is the goal or even the default, I wonder about how much constructive learning happens, never mind how little constructive teaching happens.
If anyone possesses good questions that you would like me to post, please, read my invitation post, here and follow the instructions. You'll be a guest Butler poster, and we will be happy to have you.
Project SC Butler: Sentence Correction (SC1)
THE PROMPT
Quote:
• What is the thing between the em dashes?
An appositive. It refers to and clarifies what is meant by information pollution.
The subject of the clause is still research.
• due to
→ can be replaced sensibly by caused by
→ modifies information overload
→ information overload is a noun.
I realize that overload may look like a verb. In this case, the word is a noun.
See the footnote.
→ due to is not a decision point.
Please, if you have not yet thought about the issue, do not waste any time on it.
THE OPTIONS
Quote:
• subject/verb disagreement
The singular subject research requires the singular verb has determined.
• strange meaning and horrible diction (word choice and placement)
→ What does it mean to say that "the impact of spam is LESS than the impact of information overload"?
The impact is less? Less impactful? Ugh. Less forceful? Less damaging.
→ Diction: The writers mean to say less harmful. They should do so.
ELIMINATE A
Quote:
• whenever possible, use such as, not like, to introduce examples
→ Like is used to compare nouns.
→ Such as is used to introduce examples.
In the context of introducing examples, some experts believe that this distinction between such as and like may cease to exist fairly soon.
I am dubious about such claims; the persistent presence of one official question leads me to believe that the distinction will hold.
Do be flexible. If you find that the last answer standing uses like to introduce examples, and you are sure that the other four errors contain clear error, then choose that seemingly defective last answer.
On the other hand, do not go looking for trouble. As you will see in my Notes, the OE writer in the OG VR 2022 relies on the distinction between such as and like to eliminate answer choices.
See Notes, below.
Finally, in the context of introducing examples, like will not be better than such as.
If you are leery about rejecting what might be an acceptable construction, keep B and look for a better answer.
ELIMINATE B
Quote:
• parallelism error
→ Option C erroneously compares damage caused by disruptive information pollutants to . . . information overload
→ Rethink the logic of the language: the damage caused by spam cannot be compared straightaway to information overload, but rather to damage caused by information overload.
ELIMINATE C
Quote:
• I do not see any errors.
• singular subject research correctly takes the singular verb, has
• comparison is correct and parallel
→ damage caused by disruptive info pollutants is compared to damage [THAT OF] caused by social media-generated information overload.
KEEP (and if you've been holding onto B, now is the time to dump it and scratch B off)
Quote:
• wrong verb tense
→ no reason exists to use past perfect.
Past perfect typically indicates the earlier of two past (finished!) events.
• wrong comparison - the impact of disruptive information is erroneously compared directly to information overload.
We need a comparison between disruptive information caused by spam and disruptive information caused by social media.
ELIMINATE E
The answer is D.
NOTES
-- introducing examples: like or such as?
This issue is somewhat contentious.
A couple of official questions use "like" in the non-underlined portion of the question.
[Sidebar. An aspirant has no way to know this fact, but do not rely on prose in CR and RC as examples of GMAC's position on any SC issues.]
TAKEAWAYS:
• Such as is correct
• like may be correct at some point soon
• LIKE is not better than SUCH AS
-- As far as I know, no correct official answer choice has ever used like to introduce examples.
-- The use of such as to introduce examples has never been wrong.
-- The use of like to introduce examples is not better than such as.
Like may well soon be as acceptable as such as, but like will not be better than such as—
unless, of course, GMAC suddenly gets populated by a bunch of Chomsky fanatics, in which case SC will disappear anyway.
Many people believe that GMAC will soon abandon this preference for such as.
Before I saw OG VR 2020, 2021, and 2022 I would have agreed.
I thought that one question would disappear from OG VR 2020. It did not.
The question explicitly tests such as and like to introduce examples, although both incorrect options that use like have an additional error.
The question did not disappear from OG VR 2020. You can find it in OG VR 2022. It has been around since at least 2015.
Its official explanation states:
The preferred way to introduce examples is with the phrase "such as," rather than with the word "like," which suggests a comparison.
Spoiler alert: two incorrect answers to an official question are revealed
The official question (OG VR 2020 #310) is HERE.
That question remains in OG VR 2022.
In addition to the statement above, the author of the OE writes:
(A) Like should be replaced by such as. Have been becoming is an incorrect verb tense.
(D) Like should be replaced by such as. Those of is unnecessary and awkward. Have been becoming is an incorrect verb tense.
That question remains in OG VR 2022.
In addition to the statement above, the author of the OE writes:
(A) Like should be replaced by such as. Have been becoming is an incorrect verb tense.
(D) Like should be replaced by such as. Those of is unnecessary and awkward. Have been becoming is an incorrect verb tense.
In the context of introducing examples, like will not be better than such as.
COMMENTS
chrisjonatan , welcome to SC Butler.
poojapandav95 , chrisjonatan , I have bumped you both to Best Community Reply. (The bumped posts will not show up in any particular order.)
New aspirants and those of you who might be shy: all aspirants have a standing invitation to post on SC Butler.
The best way to learn is to participate and to explain.
If you can explain something, you will soar on test day when you see the issue.
thelonghalloween , yes, almost always, to determine whether due to is correct, replace that phrase with caused by or attributable to.
If the replacement makes sense, then due to is almost certainly correct.
If the replacement does not make sense, then due to is incorrect, and we probably need because of or because.
This substitution works 90 percent of the time.
To see a couple more ways to decide whether due to is correct (when replacing it with "caused by" does not create obvious disaster), see my post and explanation by clicking here.
As thelonghalloween notes, due to answers "what" questions and modifies nouns, but never verbs or clauses.
(Do not worry if you did not think about this issue.
Due to was not a decision point.
The phrase appears in the nonunderlined portion. A few people got interested.)
There are two (three? it's late) other answers that were very close to Best Community Reply.
In the midst of a very strange and challenging world at the moment,
you all display what it takes to beat this test: show up. Try. Engage.
Kudos go to everyone tonight.
Keep up the hard work.
DUE TO in information overload due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
Overload is a noun. Due to modifies nouns.
What caused the overload? Answer: the proliferation of social media platforms.
The overload was due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
Due to is not adverbial in this sentence.
zhanbo , watch. I can turn that phrase into a relative clause and then a reduced relative clause.
Only nouns get described by relative clauses.
→ Relative clause, an adjectival modifier of the noun overload:
Research into information pollution . . . has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants such as spam is less than that of information overload that is due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
With the relative clause fully written out, the sentence is clunkier than before.
So we will reduce the relative clause:
Remove the relative pronoun (that). Remove the to be verb (is). Leave the adjective.
Now we have a reduced relative clause, which is still an adjectival modifier of the noun overload
Research into information pollution . . . has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants such as spam is less than that of information overload due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
Is this sentence elegant?
No. I have spent many years as an editor and writer, among other things.
The way that GMAC writers craft these SC questions is ingenious—and almost inimitable.
Try. Write a sentence correction question. Doing so is incredibly difficult.
I can appreciate clever testing of issues and still think that most of the correct sentences do not constitute great prose.
I do not believe that it is fruitful to nitpick.
If nitpicking is the goal or even the default, I wonder about how much constructive learning happens, never mind how little constructive teaching happens.
If anyone possesses good questions that you would like me to post, please, read my invitation post, here and follow the instructions. You'll be a guest Butler poster, and we will be happy to have you.
06 Aug 2021, 02:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
My answer is D.
Here are my points:
1. The subject is singular
Eliminate A and E
2. Use "such as" to present examples rather than "like"
Eliminate B
3. We need "that of" because the sentence should be "has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants like unsolicited electronic messages (spam) is less than the damage caused by information overload due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
Eliminate C.
The answer is D
Eliminate C
Here are my points:
1. The subject is singular
Eliminate A and E
2. Use "such as" to present examples rather than "like"
Eliminate B
3. We need "that of" because the sentence should be "has determined that the damage caused by disruptive information pollutants like unsolicited electronic messages (spam) is less than the damage caused by information overload due to the proliferation of social media platforms.
Eliminate C.
The answer is D
Eliminate C
