It is currently 17 Oct 2017, 11:58

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 June
Open Detailed Calendar

The usefulness of lie detectors cannot be overestimated.

Author Message
Director
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 870

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 7

Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
The usefulness of lie detectors cannot be overestimated. [#permalink]

Show Tags

12 Sep 2007, 23:11
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The usefulness of lie detectors cannot be overestimated. Although there is no employee screening procedure that is 100 percent accurate, the lie detector is a valuable tool for employers and employees alike. The lie detector’s usefulness is amply demonstrated in a recent survey conducted by a prestigious university. In the survey, those employees of a large company who were applying for a newly created position within the company were asked if they had ever worked on Project X. More than one-third of the applicants studied lied and said they had worked on the project—a project that never existed.

Which one of the following best identifies a flaw in the author’s argument about the usefulness of lie detectors?

(A) The argument depends on the assumption that whatever is good for the employer is good for the employee.
(B) Since lie detectors are known to be less than 100 percent accurate, the test will tend to help only those with something to hide.
(C) By referring to a prestigious university, the author is appealing to authority rather than to evidence.
(D) The study shows only that certain individual will lie, not that the lie detector can detect them.
(E) The author fails to address the issue that the use of lie detectors may fail to prevent embezzlement.

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 7

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Posts: 293

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

Location: Russia, Moscow

Show Tags

13 Sep 2007, 00:32
Fistail wrote:
The usefulness of lie detectors cannot be overestimated. Although there is no employee screening procedure that is 100 percent accurate, the lie detector is a valuable tool for employers and employees alike. The lie detector’s usefulness is amply demonstrated in a recent survey conducted by a prestigious university. In the survey, those employees of a large company who were applying for a newly created position within the company were asked if they had ever worked on Project X. More than one-third of the applicants studied lied and said they had worked on the project—a project that never existed.

Which one of the following best identifies a flaw in the author’s argument about the usefulness of lie detectors?

(A) The argument depends on the assumption that whatever is good for the employer is good for the employee.
(B) Since lie detectors are known to be less than 100 percent accurate, the test will tend to help only those with something to hide.
(C) By referring to a prestigious university, the author is appealing to authority rather than to evidence.
(D) The study shows only that certain individual will lie, not that the lie detector can detect them.
(E) The author fails to address the issue that the use of lie detectors may fail to prevent embezzlement.

I think it is D

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 0

CEO
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2554

Kudos [?]: 511 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

13 Sep 2007, 00:40
I say D. C is the only other one that comes close, but it sounds like GMAT extremism and ventures too far from the argument.

Kudos [?]: 511 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 167

Kudos [?]: 103 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

13 Sep 2007, 01:02
IMO, D

Kudos [?]: 103 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 156

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

13 Sep 2007, 01:30
Looks like D.

From what I understand, the piece isn't saying that the lie was detected by the lie detector. It was detected because the answer given could only possibly be a lie. So the claim tells us nothing about the effectiveness of lie detectors.

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 06 Aug 2007
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Show Tags

13 Sep 2007, 03:16
Main conclusion of the argument is " The usefulness of lie detectors cannot be overestimated ", which depends on the sub-conclusion "the lie detector is a valuable tool for employers and employees alike". In turn, sub-conclusion is supported by the survey that acts as evidance/premise.
Survey only supports the conclusion to the extent that lie detectors are valuable for EMPLOYERS, while the argument mistakenly assumes that what is valuable for employers is also valuable for employees. there is no supporting information for this assumption.

A) correctly identifies the flaw in reasoning.

D) it seems to possibly identify the weakness/consfusion in the premise, but this is not the area that is tested in LR. I don't think we need to worry about validity, truthfulness or confusion in premise. it's same as spelling mistakes are not tested in SC.
In LR, I believe, logic behind the argument is tested. we gotta see whether infomation provided in the argument logically supports the conclusion? and, whether author makes reasonable assumptions ?

what is source of this question ?

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 11 Sep 2006
Posts: 48

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

13 Sep 2007, 08:01
A for the same reason as above.

Kudos [?]: 89 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 870

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 7

Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School

Show Tags

13 Sep 2007, 08:17
OA is D.

Kudos [?]: 264 [0], given: 7

Intern
Joined: 06 Aug 2007
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Show Tags

13 Sep 2007, 18:40
can you please tell the source ?

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Interesting story about lie detector   [#permalink] 13 Sep 2007, 18:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by