Scientists attempting to replicate certain controversial results repor

D, conclusion can be true only if the replication experiments are assumed to be not effected by faulty measurements

(A) the original experiments had not been described in sufficient detail to make an exact replication possible
We aren't concerned with how the original experiments had been described, just the conclusion and how it was reached.

(B) the fact that the originally reported results aroused controversy made it highly likely that they were in error
This doesn't explain why the measurements in the original experiment would have been wrong.

(C) the theoretical principles called into question by the originally reported results were themselves based on weak evidence
If they were originally based on weak evidence, this would undermine the replication.

(D) the replication experiments were not so likely as the original experiments to be marred by faulty measurements
Bingo! This explains why the scientists attempting to replicate the results are so sure that there couldn't have been an error on their end.

(E) the researchers who originally reported the controversial results had themselves observed those results only once
It's not important to us how many times those results have been observed.

The correct answer choice is D.


Please give kudos if this was helpful in any way!

Scientists attempting to replicate certain controversial results reported by a group of experienced researchers failed to get the same results as those reported. The conclusion drawn from this by the scientists who conducted the replication experiments was that the originally reported results had been due to faulty measurements.

Scientist -> failed to get the same results as the Original Report Results
Original Report Results -> Faulty Measurements

There is no missing link here. So it should be a defender assumption type question.

What if the scientists' result was wrong because they had committed errors while conducting the experiment and the original report results were correct?
Even if the original results were wrong, could it be the case that the scientists' results at the same time were wrong?

The argument of the scientists who conducted the replication experiments assumes that

Not enough information for replicating the experiment is different to the faulty of the original experiment. (A) is out.
If this is true, it also could be true that the there were errors in conducting while the scientists conducting the experiments — and it was not because of the faulty measurement of the original results. (B) is out.
Theoretical principles: This is out of scope. (C) is out.
This matches our though. Hang on to this.
This is similar to (B). This leaves the possibility that the scientists themselves have committed errors while replicating the experiments regardless of the results of the original experiment.

(D) is the correct answer.

You don't need to do POE on this one.
So how could the scientists who performed replication figure out that the original experiment was flawed? Only if their (rep scientist) method/process had no flaws , right?

Hope this helps!

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.