Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 15:11 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 15:11
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
bholakc
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Last visit: 14 Sep 2011
Posts: 54
Own Kudos:
492
 [34]
Posts: 54
Kudos: 492
 [34]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
27
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
fluke
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Last visit: 24 Oct 2013
Posts: 1,099
Own Kudos:
5,095
 [12]
Given Kudos: 376
Posts: 1,099
Kudos: 5,095
 [12]
9
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
avatar
ankit1234suhane
Joined: 28 May 2011
Last visit: 18 Dec 2011
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
2
 [2]
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 3
Kudos: 2
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
parker
avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Last visit: 20 Oct 2011
Posts: 113
Own Kudos:
1,852
 [3]
Given Kudos: 1
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 113
Kudos: 1,852
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Great explanation fluke!

This is a classic type of assumption. Anytime you are presented with an observation about two events that CORRELATE, and the conclusion makes a CAUSAL claim, it's a very good idea to check that there were not alternate models of causation that could have explained the observed phenomenon.

Remember that you're looking for a *necessary* assumption for these arguments--without that assumption being true, the argument falls apart. As gmatpassion said above, if you negate choice B the conclusion will no longer hold. That means the positive version of the answer choice must have been necessary to uphold the conclusion. In this case, the argument makes a causal claim (family problems CAUSE academic difficulties) based on the observed correlation between one student's drop in GPA and that student's family difficulties. This observation is of two events that happened at the SAME TIME. CAUSATION, however, implies that one happened BEFORE the other and LED to the other. One possible explanation of the correlation is the conclusion mentioned, but it's just as possible that the reverse model of causation was true (or that some third unknown factor caused both...for example, what if the student developed a psychological disorder that affected both relationships and GPA?)

I don't recommend defaulting to negation for all five choices because it can take some time, but if you're down to 2 answers choices and are having a hard time figuring out which is necessary and which is merely "helpful," negation is a very powerful tool. Here, if we say that the GPA decline WAS the reason for the arguments, then it's not possible for the arguments to have been the reason for the GPA decline (as the original conclusion posits). This must be our answer.
User avatar
TGC
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Last visit: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 579
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 322
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE:Information Technology (Finance: Investment Banking)
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
Posts: 579
Kudos: 3,560
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Classic case of causal reasoning.

Stated relation is not reversed that weakens the argument.
So that possibility is highlighted and avoided by option (B).

Hence , (B).
User avatar
jugglerG2
Joined: 21 Sep 2014
Last visit: 18 Jun 2021
Posts: 206
Own Kudos:
125
 [1]
Given Kudos: 73
Status:Birds fly because they have wings, not because they have sky.
Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.65
WE:Information Technology (Consulting)
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Negating B reverses the cause and effect and subsequently the argument falls flat. Answer should B.
avatar
Jez0612
Joined: 10 Dec 2016
Last visit: 24 Jul 2017
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 8
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
parker
Great explanation fluke!

This is a classic type of assumption. Anytime you are presented with an observation about two events that CORRELATE, and the conclusion makes a CAUSAL claim, it's a very good idea to check that there were not alternate models of causation that could have explained the observed phenomenon.

Remember that you're looking for a *necessary* assumption for these arguments--without that assumption being true, the argument falls apart. As gmatpassion said above, if you negate choice B the conclusion will no longer hold. That means the positive version of the answer choice must have been necessary to uphold the conclusion. In this case, the argument makes a causal claim (family problems CAUSE academic difficulties) based on the observed correlation between one student's drop in GPA and that student's family difficulties. This observation is of two events that happened at the SAME TIME. CAUSATION, however, implies that one happened BEFORE the other and LED to the other. One possible explanation of the correlation is the conclusion mentioned, but it's just as possible that the reverse model of causation was true (or that some third unknown factor caused both...for example, what if the student developed a psychological disorder that affected both relationships and GPA?)

I don't recommend defaulting to negation for all five choices because it can take some time, but if you're down to 2 answers choices and are having a hard time figuring out which is necessary and which is merely "helpful," negation is a very powerful tool. Here, if we say that the GPA decline WAS the reason for the arguments, then it's not possible for the arguments to have been the reason for the GPA decline (as the original conclusion posits). This must be our answer.

Hi,
thanks for your helpful sulotion, but I am wondering why (C) is not correct. In this case, one of my brainstormed assuption is that "GPA can be the indicator for acedemic ability, which is the intellectual ability (is it right?)". So, when it comes to (C), it meets the assumption that GPA is the accurate measure of intellectual ability. Here, we can use the negation method. Then (C)'s negation is GPA is not the accurate measure of intellectual ability, and that clearly hurts the conclusion based on the above assumption. If GPA cannot reflect the academic ability, how can they say the lower GPA means academic difficulties? -----even stronger than (B)

Is there anything i misunderstood? Thanks for more explanation:)
User avatar
anje29
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Last visit: 15 Apr 2018
Posts: 187
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 59
Status:Active
Affiliations: NA
GMAT 1: 590 Q50 V21
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V37
GPA: 3.5
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V37
Posts: 187
Kudos: 118
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Jez0612
parker
Great explanation fluke!

This is a classic type of assumption. Anytime you are presented with an observation about two events that CORRELATE, and the conclusion makes a CAUSAL claim, it's a very good idea to check that there were not alternate models of causation that could have explained the observed phenomenon.

Remember that you're looking for a *necessary* assumption for these arguments--without that assumption being true, the argument falls apart. As gmatpassion said above, if you negate choice B the conclusion will no longer hold. That means the positive version of the answer choice must have been necessary to uphold the conclusion. In this case, the argument makes a causal claim (family problems CAUSE academic difficulties) based on the observed correlation between one student's drop in GPA and that student's family difficulties. This observation is of two events that happened at the SAME TIME. CAUSATION, however, implies that one happened BEFORE the other and LED to the other. One possible explanation of the correlation is the conclusion mentioned, but it's just as possible that the reverse model of causation was true (or that some third unknown factor caused both...for example, what if the student developed a psychological disorder that affected both relationships and GPA?)

I don't recommend defaulting to negation for all five choices because it can take some time, but if you're down to 2 answers choices and are having a hard time figuring out which is necessary and which is merely "helpful," negation is a very powerful tool. Here, if we say that the GPA decline WAS the reason for the arguments, then it's not possible for the arguments to have been the reason for the GPA decline (as the original conclusion posits). This must be our answer.

Hi,
thanks for your helpful sulotion, but I am wondering why (C) is not correct. In this case, one of my brainstormed assuption is that "GPA can be the indicator for acedemic ability, which is the intellectual ability (is it right?)". So, when it comes to (C), it meets the assumption that GPA is the accurate measure of intellectual ability. Here, we can use the negation method. Then (C)'s negation is GPA is not the accurate measure of intellectual ability, and that clearly hurts the conclusion based on the above assumption. If GPA cannot reflect the academic ability, how can they say the lower GPA means academic difficulties? -----even stronger than (B)

Is there anything i misunderstood? Thanks for more explanation:)


Hello there , you are not following correct approach . Hope my explanation will help

Student Advisor: One of our exchange students faced multiple arguments with her parents over the course of the past year. Not surprisingly, her grade point average (GPA)over the same period showed a steep decline. This is just one example of a general truth: problematic family relationships can cause significant academic difficulties for our students.

Which of the following is an assumption underlying the general truism claimed by the Student Advisor?
(A) Last year, the exchange student reduced the amount of time spent on academic work, resulting in a lower GPA.
(B) The decline in the GPA of the. exchange student was not the reason for the student's arguments with her parents.
(C) School GPA is an accurate measure of a student's intellectual ability.
(D) If proper measures are not taken, the decline in the student's academic performance may become irreversible.
(E) Fluctuations in academic performance are typical for many students.

Conclusion here : This is just one example of a general truth: problematic family relationships can cause significant academic difficulties for our students.

assumption question requires statement that is required for the argument or conclusion to be true. So option C is irrelevant as it doesnt affect conclusion in any way whereas option B strengthens the conclusion by confirming that reason is not other way possible i.e. GPA decline is not the reason of argument .
avatar
nawaf52
Joined: 09 Oct 2016
Last visit: 20 Sep 2018
Posts: 27
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 24
Posts: 27
Kudos: 51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Could someone please explain what the question about? I understood the argument fully but I got it wrong because I fail to identify the type of the question.
Thanks
User avatar
sayantanc2k
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Last visit: 09 Dec 2022
Posts: 2,393
Own Kudos:
15,523
 [2]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Expert
Expert reply
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
Posts: 2,393
Kudos: 15,523
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nawaf52
Could someone please explain what the question about? I understood the argument fully but I got it wrong because I fail to identify the type of the question.
Thanks

This is a typical GMAT CR structure for assumption type questions. The generalisation of this structure is as follows:

Observation: A and B are seen to happen together.
Conclusion: A causes B

Assumption in the above conclusion: B does not cause A.

In the subject question,
A = Problematic family relation (argument with parents)
B = Academic difficulty (poor GPA).
avatar
suhanisinghal
Joined: 27 Apr 2021
Last visit: 06 Feb 2022
Posts: 7
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 5
Posts: 7
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
in option b if you negate it doesnt it actually support the argument whereas negation should make the argument baseless.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,830
Own Kudos:
Posts: 18,830
Kudos: 986
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
189 posts