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

 It is currently 17 Jan 2019, 15:58

### 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

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in January
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
303112345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829303112
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### The winning strategy for a high GRE score

January 17, 2019

January 17, 2019

08:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Learn the winning strategy for a high GRE score — what do people who reach a high score do differently? We're going to share insights, tips and strategies from data we've collected from over 50,000 students who used examPAL.
• ### Free GMAT Strategy Webinar

January 19, 2019

January 19, 2019

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.

# Shell game - watch it!

Author Message
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 740
Location: Singapore
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: Chicago Booth - Class of 2015
Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2010, 10:24
6
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

77% (01:25) correct 23% (01:32) wrong based on 398 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

I couldn't find very helpful answers. So reopening the question! Will appreciate if you will provide reasoning along with the answers.

Newspaper editorial:
In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
* Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.
* Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.
* The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.
* Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.
* The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.
Senior Manager
Status: Current Student
Joined: 14 Oct 2009
Posts: 365
Schools: Chicago Booth 2013, Ross, Duke , Kellogg , Stanford, Haas
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2010, 14:58
1
I would say C. If the group of people signing up for these courses were already less likely to commit crimes after being released, then the argument that removing these courses will cause more crime afterward falls apart. The assumption that the difference between groups comes as a result of the action and is not already there before is necessary to claim the action had any impact
_________________
Manager
Joined: 04 May 2009
Posts: 51
Location: Astoria, NYC
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2010, 17:03
I am also leaning towards C. If the inmates who took college classes were already determined to not commit crimes when released, then its not the classes that helps establish the ultimate goal
Intern
Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 12
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2010, 18:05
2
nusmavrik wrote:
I couldn't find very helpful answers. So reopening the question! Will appreciate if you will provide reasoning along with the answers.

Newspaper editorial:
In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Conclusion : This action is clearly counter to the governor's ultimate goal

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
* Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed. It means taking college-level courses while in prison deters one from committing crime, which does support the conclusion. We can keep this aside while we go over the other options.
* Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population. Out of scope
* The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released. This means that the group was as likely to commit the crimes as the others who had not taken the courses. This contradicts the conclusion as the argument tells us that the inmates who actually took the courses committed far fewer crimes
* Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does. Out of scope
* The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.Out of scope

The words(anyone etc) in A are strong and look a little extreme and thus act as a red herring. However, going over the other options does show us that A is indeed correct(hope it is ).

IMO A.

Hope it helps,
meshtrap
Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 213
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2010, 18:25
IMO A. Nice explaination by meshtrap
_________________

If you like my post, consider giving me some KUDOS !!!!! Like you I need them

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 355
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2010, 20:32
2
A is definitely wrong

f the presence/absence of college courses will NOT DETER crime, then that is essentially saying that it has no effect.
therefore, since there's no effect, this action will NOT be "counter to the governor's ultimate goal".

the argument depends upon the assumption that eliminating college-level courses will have an effect on inmates' rates of recidivism ("counter to the governor's ultimate goal"). in other words, the argument is assuming that the college-level courses CAUSE differences in the inmates' behavior.

if you're going to argue that X causes Y, one necessary precondition (assumption) is that Y DOESN'T cause X.
this is precisely what is asserted in (c), which should be the correct answer.
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 740
Location: Singapore
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: Chicago Booth - Class of 2015
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2010, 21:18
1
I like the reasoning given by Michmax3 and gurpreet07. OA is C

Two ways to look at the problem :

1) The assumption that the difference between groups comes as a result of the action and is not already there before is necessary to claim the action had any impact

2) if you're going to argue that X causes Y, one necessary precondition (assumption) is that Y DOESN'T cause X. this is precisely what is asserted in (c), which should be the correct answer.

Second one is a hurricane. But I think few people will visualize this. Awesome guys Gave kudos !
Intern
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 41
Location: currently in Taiwan
Schools: Top Taiwanese university
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jul 2010, 06:48
yep, easy C...
if those who had previously took these courses were already less likely to commit other crimes, than the whole process doesn't make any sense. they didn't get converted because of the courses but the complete self-displine
it's like playing basketball. some say that taller kids are better at basketbal whereas to some its because most of the time, taller people are more inclined to play.
Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2010
Posts: 122
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2010, 12:52
C.......for me reasoning on the lines as gurpreet07
Manager
Status: It's "Go" Time.......
Affiliations: N.C.C.
Joined: 22 Feb 2011
Posts: 144
Location: India
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2011, 08:34
Relatively easy question..got "C" in 1:54
See explanations next to the options
nusmavrik wrote:
I couldn't find very helpful answers. So reopening the question! Will appreciate if you will provide reasoning along with the answers.

Newspaper editorial:
In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
* Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.This option strengthens governor's conclusion(decision) of not allowing inmates to access college-level courses, the conclusion with which argument is not in agreement.
* Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.Out of scope
* The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.It removes a condition which if true will weaken the argument, thus best choice among all.
* Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does."Effect of high school level courses??Unrelated to the argument!"
* The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime."Out of scope"

_________________

We are twice armed if we fight with faith.

He who knows when he can fight & when He can't will be victorious.

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 438
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Apr 2011, 03:57
'The assumption that the difference between groups comes as a result of the action and is not already there before is necessary to claim the action had any impact'

C hence.
Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 199
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2012, 05:44
Straight C.

Another example of a cause-and-effect fallacy type question.

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.
_________________

+1 Kudos me - I'm half Irish, half Prussian.

Intern
Joined: 14 Apr 2015
Posts: 6
Location: Viet Nam
Schools: HBS '21
GPA: 3.1
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Apr 2015, 11:32
Anyone can clearify premises and comclusion. I don't understand.
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2015
Posts: 111
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Apr 2015, 07:59
I went with C. I did not go with A because:
(A) Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.
- No CL C = unlikely to stop already decided criminal.

I find this sentence quite odd. It says that no courses is unlikely to 'stop future crimes'. It doesn't say anything about if courses actually do the opposite, maybe none of the two options has any effect what so ever on future crime rates? If that's the case it is not needed to support the conclusion.
_________________

I love being wrong. An incorrect answer offers an extraordinary opportunity to improve.

Intern
Joined: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 1
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Dec 2017, 11:23
nusmavrik wrote:
I couldn't find very helpful answers. So reopening the question! Will appreciate if you will provide reasoning along with the answers.

Newspaper editorial:
In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
* Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.
* Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.
* The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.
* Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.
* The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.

A- this goes against the conclusion, so cannot be an assumption;
B- the question is comparing inmates who take college courses vs the ones who don't, so out of scope;
C- [correct] this supports the conclusion because the negation test would make the conclusion wrong (The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released. -> then the college courses have no effect on the crime rate and thus the governor's action is correct - which goes against the author's statement;)
D- the question is comparing inmates who take college courses vs the ones who don't, so out of scope;
E- not related to conclusion, that is checking whether or not the college courses are effective;
Intern
Joined: 19 Feb 2018
Posts: 25
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jul 2018, 16:23
Quote:
Newspaper editorial:
In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A) Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.
B) Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.
C) The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.
D) Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.
E) The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.

Hi,

Can anyone please tell me why E is out of scope.
In the given argument:
1) Conclusion: Action is clearly counter to the governor's goal
2) Premise:
(a) In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher.
(b) Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses.
(c) after being released from prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates

My question is what is "Govorner's Ultimate Goal"? There is no mention of it in the premise hence any answer choice which answers this question should be the correct answer. Most of the members are mentioning C as the answer; however, I believe trying to answer this question with C&E approach is irrelevant since answer choice should be more concerned with author conclusion and not what is stated in a premise.

Thanks
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 52231
Re: Shell game - watch it!  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jul 2018, 20:28
harsh8686 wrote:
Quote:
Newspaper editorial:
In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher. Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses. However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A) Not being able to take college-level courses while in prison is unlikely to deter anyone from a crime that he or she might otherwise have committed.
B) Former inmates are no more likely to commit crimes than are members of the general population.
C) The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes after being released.
D) Taking high school level courses in prison has less effect on an inmate’s subsequent behavior than taking college-level courses does.
E) The governor’s ultimate goal actually is to gain popularity by convincing people that something effective is being done about crime.

Hi,

Can anyone please tell me why E is out of scope.
In the given argument:
1) Conclusion: Action is clearly counter to the governor's goal
2) Premise:
(a) In an attempt to reduce the crime rate, the governor is getting tough on criminals and making prison conditions harsher.
(b) Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to college-level courses.
(c) after being released from prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates

My question is what is "Govorner's Ultimate Goal"? There is no mention of it in the premise hence any answer choice which answers this question should be the correct answer. Most of the members are mentioning C as the answer; however, I believe trying to answer this question with C&E approach is irrelevant since answer choice should be more concerned with author conclusion and not what is stated in a premise.

Thanks

This question has extensive discussion here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/newspaper-ed ... 11320.html Hope it helps.

THIS TOPIC IS LOCKED AND ARCHIVED.
_________________
Re: Shell game - watch it! &nbs [#permalink] 29 Jul 2018, 20:28
Display posts from previous: Sort by