Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 07:19 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 07:19
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
Sub 505 Level|   Logical Flaw|                        
User avatar
mono
Joined: 09 Nov 2006
Last visit: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
289
 [58]
Posts: 5
Kudos: 289
 [58]
14
Kudos
Add Kudos
44
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
vsaxenaGMAT
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Last visit: 22 Jun 2009
Posts: 38
Own Kudos:
21
 [11]
Posts: 38
Kudos: 21
 [11]
10
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
harikrish
Joined: 05 Nov 2014
Last visit: 20 Nov 2018
Posts: 74
Own Kudos:
85
 [7]
Given Kudos: 113
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GMAT 1: 580 Q49 V21
GPA: 3.75
Products:
GMAT 1: 580 Q49 V21
Posts: 74
Kudos: 85
 [7]
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
Sachin9
Joined: 22 Jul 2012
Last visit: 25 Dec 2015
Posts: 351
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 562
Status:Gonna rock this time!!!
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q43 V34
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
GMAT 2: 630 Q47 V29
Posts: 351
Kudos: 174
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
the passage is ambiguous
all it says is that

its weight gain has been below the United States average..
now a reader can infer this to be
its weight gain has been below the United States average weight gain
or
its weight gain has been below the United States average weight..

Isn't it?
avatar
nandetapuri
Joined: 12 Mar 2017
Last visit: 03 Aug 2017
Posts: 30
Own Kudos:
29
 [3]
Given Kudos: 22
Posts: 30
Kudos: 29
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The average normal infant born in the United States weights between 12 and 14 pounds at the age of three months. Therefore, if a three-month-old child weights only 10 pounds, its weight gain has been below the United States average.

Which of the following a flaw in the reasoning above?

A. Weight is only one measure of normal infant development.
Very very tempting answer but are we concerned about the normal infant development?

B. Some three-month-old children weigh as much as 17 pounds.
The word some vs average clash with each other

C. It is possible for a normal child to weigh 10 pounds at birth.
For us anything is possible but we need to present a solid evidence for it.

D. The phrase "below average" does not necessarily mean insufficient.
We are again not concerned with insufficiency about it.

E. Average weight gain is not the same as average weight.
Bingo! The last sentence assumes that the weight gain is same as the average weight and therefore came to such flawed reasoning.
User avatar
PrashantK0099
Joined: 09 Sep 2020
Last visit: 27 Oct 2020
Posts: 64
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 45
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Posts: 64
Kudos: 46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The flaw is that average weight does not give any indication about weight gain. Hence "E"
User avatar
PReciSioN
Joined: 17 Dec 2023
Last visit: 14 Apr 2025
Posts: 95
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 47
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
Posts: 95
Kudos: 77
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
"The average normal infant born in the United States weighs between twelve and fourteen pounds at the age of three months." - Is this statement ambiguous?

A) The average weight of infants in US @ 3 months is b/w 12-14 lbs. (This is the version assumed in the question )

Can it also mean

B) The average weight of 'normal' infants ( a subset of all infants) is b/w 12-14 lbs. (Is this not a better interpretation? And if this is the case, then in the conclusion which states "its weight gain has been below the United States average." , isn't the fact that the conclusion is conflating the 'normal' class' average with the US average, also a flaw?)

avigutman , GMATNinja MartyMurray could you help clarify this please? Thanks!
User avatar
MartyMurray
Joined: 11 Aug 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,630
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 173
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 1,630
Kudos: 6,122
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PReciSioN
"The average normal infant born in the United States weighs between twelve and fourteen pounds at the age of three months." - Is this statement ambiguous?

A) The average weight of infants in US @ 3 months is b/w 12-14 lbs. (This is the version assumed in the question )
I don't think the question assumes that. Notice that "the average weight" is not at issue. "The average weight" is not mentioned.
Quote:
Can it also mean

B) The average weight of 'normal' infants ( a subset of all infants) is b/w 12-14 lbs. (Is this not a better interpretation?
Absolutely, it can, and appears to, mean that.
Quote:
And if this is the case, then in the conclusion which states "its weight gain has been below the United States average." , isn't the fact that the conclusion is conflating the 'normal' class' average with the US average, also a flaw?)
Yes, we could perhaps consider that a secondary flaw.
User avatar
PReciSioN
Joined: 17 Dec 2023
Last visit: 14 Apr 2025
Posts: 95
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 47
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
GMAT Focus 1: 795 Q90 V90 DI88
Posts: 95
Kudos: 77
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MartyMurray

PReciSioN
"The average normal infant born in the United States weighs between twelve and fourteen pounds at the age of three months." - Is this statement ambiguous?

A) The average weight of infants in US @ 3 months is b/w 12-14 lbs. (This is the version assumed in the question )
I don't think the question assumes that. Notice that "the average weight" is not at issue. "The average weight" is not mentioned.
Quote:
Can it also mean

B) The average weight of 'normal' infants ( a subset of all infants) is b/w 12-14 lbs. (Is this not a better interpretation?
Absolutely, it can, and appears to, mean that.
Quote:
 And if this is the case, then in the conclusion which states "its weight gain has been below the United States average." , isn't the fact that the conclusion is conflating the 'normal' class' average with the US average, also a flaw?)
Yes, we could perhaps consider that a secondary flaw.
­Thanks for the reply MartyMurray

In this case, could we consider A to be somewhat indicative of a flaw as well? 
A states - "Weight is only one measure of normal infant development." . If suppose we took the opposite of A and assumed that weight was the only measure of a normal infant (I've conveniently skipped development, which is mentioned in the option), then in that case the line which states "The average normal infant .... weighs b/w 12-14 lbs" could be taken to mean that the US avg is b/w 12-14 lbs, making the conclusion somewhat better. 

But I suppose, since A doesn't really seem to resolve the 'secondary flaw' we discussed very well, and the fact that E is ofcourse a glaring flaw (we cannot assume that all infants have the same weight at birth), we choose E? Am I right in this reasoning? Thanks Marty!
avatar
ManifestDreamMBA
Joined: 17 Sep 2024
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,282
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 236
Products:
Posts: 1,282
Kudos: 785
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Couple of things to note that can be attacked
1. Avg weight at the age of 3 months
- if we get anything which isn't avg weight, that can be a flaw.
- Also, we are only considered with weight at 3months of age
2. its weight gain has been below the United States average
- where did weight gain come from, can be a flaw
- we only know the range for avg weight. one data point can be outside the range too

(A) Weight is only one measure of normal infant development.
We don't care

(B) Some three-month-old children weigh as much as seventeen pounds.
We don't care, can be true though!

(C) It is possible for a normal child to weigh ten pounds at birth.
We don't care, we are looking for something for 3 month old

(D) The phrase "below average" does not necessarily mean insufficient.
Insufficient for what?

(E) Average weight gain is not the same as average weight.
Yes, this is what we are looking for
mono
The average normal infant born in the United States weighs between twelve and fourteen pounds at the age of three months. Therefore, if a three-month-old child weighs only ten pounds, its weight gain has been below the United States average.

Which of the following indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?

(A) Weight is only one measure of normal infant development.

(B) Some three-month-old children weigh as much as seventeen pounds.

(C) It is possible for a normal child to weigh ten pounds at birth.

(D) The phrase "below average" does not necessarily mean insufficient.

(E) Average weight gain is not the same as average weight.


Is it really different "average weight gain" from "average weight"? What meaning is hidden??
­
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
188 posts