In a study of the effect of color on productivity, 50 of 100 factory

Question

In a study of the effect of color on productivity, 50 of 100 factory workers were moved from their drab workroom to brightly colored workroom. Both these workers and the 50 who remained in the drab workroom increased their productivity, probably as a result of the interest taken by the researchers in the work of both groups during the study.
Which of the following, if true, would cast most doubt upon the author's interpretation of the study results given above?

Which of the following, if true, would cast most doubt upon the author's interpretation of the study results given above?

(A) The 50 workers moved to the brightly colored room performed precisely the same manufacturing task as the workers who remained in the drab workroom.

(B) The drab workroom was designed to provide adequate space for at most 65 workers.

(C) the 50 workers who moved to the brightly colored workroom were matched as closely as possible in age and level of training to the 50 workeres who remained in the drab workroom.

(D) Nearly all the workers in both groups had volunteered to move to the brightly colored workroom.
 
(E) Many of the workers who moved to the brightly colored workroom reported that they liked the drab workroom as well as or better than they liked the brightly colored workroom.

Practicegmat · Accepted Answer

In a study of the effect of color on productivity, 50 of 100 factory workers were moved from their drab workroom to brightly colored workroom. Both these workers and the 50 who remained in the drab workroom increased their productivity, probably as a result of the interest taken by the researchers in the work of both groups during the study.
Which of the following, if true, would cast most doubt upon the author's interpretation of the study results given above?

EFFECT : Both 50 workers in brightly colored workroom and the 50 who remained in the drab workroom increased their productivity
CAUSE: Probably as a result of the interest taken by the researchers in the work of both groups during the study.

For weakening such causal relations like this , check for any of the following in the answers :
1) Find an alternate cause of the stated effect
2)Show that even when the cause occurs, the effect doesn't ccur
3)Show that although the effect occurs, the cause did not occur
4)Show that the stated relationship is reversed
5)Show that a statistical problem exists with the data used to make the causal statement

A) The 50 workers moved to the brightly colored room performed precisely the same manufacturing task as the workers who remained in the drab workroom. 
This answer choice points out similarity (rather than dissimilarity) between the working conditions of both the groups.Hence in one way, it stregthens that the interest of the researchers can be the cause of the increased productivity, as the working conditions were same for both the groups.
 B) The drab workroom was designed to provide adequate space for at most 65 workers. 
Here we find an alternate cause that might have increased the productivity of the drab room workers. The space was more there. Hence, even if the drab room workers saw the colours, the extra space made them comfortable to be more efficient in their work. Hence this answer choice puts doubt on the cause " interest taken by the researchers in the work of both groups during the study" for the increase of productivity.
This choice matches with (1) mentioned above
 C) the 50 workers who moved to the brightly colored workroom were matched as closely as possible in age and level of training to the 50 workeres who remained in the drab workroom. 
Similar to (A), the option points out similarity (rather than dissimilarity) between the working conditions of both the groups.Hence in one way, it stregthens that the interest of the researchers can be the cause of the increased productivity, as the working conditions were same for both the groups.
 D) Nearly all the workers in both groups as volunteered to move to the brightly colored workroom. 
Even though people volunteered, finally 50 were kept in the drab room. This is the fact. Hence who volunteered and who didnt, or whether people volunteered or not, is none of this argument's business
 E) Many of the workers who moved to the brightly colored workroom as well as or better than they liked the brightly colored workroom. 
The brightly colored room might be favorite for many, but this fact doesn't give reasons as to how the efficiency of the people in the drab room also increased.Hence in one way, this choice stregthens that the interest of the researchers can be the cause of the increased productivity, as the working conditions were same for both the groups.

Correct answer is (B)

OldFritz · Answer

The answer options are fraught with typos, ambiguity, etc.

Nevertheless B sounds best, since it gives an alternative reasoning for tr increase in productivity by those who remained in drab location, videlicet: more spacious working environment.

Cheers.

Posted from my mobile device

tuanquang269 · Answer

Choice B makes sense as the weakening the interpretation of the result from the experiment above. Due to the overcrowding among the workers, 100 workers cannot take the tasks productively in the room that have standard space limit to 65 persons.

prakash111687 · Answer

Hi tuanquang269

But the author of the argument calls researcher's work into question, i.e. brightly colored room was not the cause for increased productivity but the researchers work. since the workers were aware of "effect of color" research- workers who worked in drab room too increased their productivity. please correct me if my reasoning is wrong.

tuanquang269 · Answer

The conclusion of the argument:
Both two groups of workers increased their productivity (A) because (B) the interest of each group in color
(B) => (A)

My reasoning means two both groups are not affected by color but by the wider space (C) they worked in. Therefore, (C) => (A).

The factor (B) is wrong. So, what happens with the researchers? Their interpretation (The workers were aware of "effects of color" as you mentioned) did not work.

bschooladmit · Answer

B it is. I was confused between author and researcher in the beginning!

researcher => Both bright and 50 who remained increased productivity
author => Increased productivity is because of researchers interest.

Weaken author => It is not because of researchers interest but by something else or, researcher interest is faulty.

B => only 65 capacity (initially 100 were there so they were not productive) now only 50 => enough to work hence increased productivity.

tuanquang269 · Answer

The conclusion of the argument:
Both two groups of workers increased their productivity (A) because (B) the interest of each group in color
(B) => (A) 
  Is this mentioned ? I am not able to interpret the conclusion in this way . Please explain     The argument mention this interest is taken by researchers. This does not mean the INTEREST OF RESEARCHERS. Remember it!!

My reasoning means two both groups are not affected by color but by the wider space (C) they worked in. Therefore, (C) => (A).
  But as per the option , only the The drab workroom was designed for morespace, not the brighly coloured workroom   
   Yes, you are right. This answer did not mention the brightly colored workroom. However, if we just weaken the reasoning that one room is affected by color (the group in drab workroom), we attack the argument's reasoning. That's enough. How can you reason one of group is affected by color to increase its productivity => Conclude: Both two groups increase their productivity by the color.

The factor (B) is wrong. So, what happens with the researchers? Their interpretation (The workers were aware of "effects of color" as you mentioned) did not work.
  As per thr stimulus , did the researchers interpret that the workers were aware of the effects of color ? Please explain a bit more   
Yes, the researchers did. However, "the workers were aware of the effects of color" is mentioned by "prakash111687".

Rumikido3 · Answer

Below I describe my analysis:

Structure  
P1: study of the effect of color on productivity: 50 of 100 factory workers were moved from their drab workroom to brightly colored workroom. 
P2: Both these workers and the 50 who remained in the drab workroom increased their productivity.
Conc: The interest taken by the researchers in the work of both groups probably cause increase of productivity of both groups.

Argument analysis  
This is a causal argument. The question stem is asking for a way to weaken the causal conclusion.
1st: Falsify conclusion: What if there was another reason why workers in both groups increased productivity?? 
2nd: The answer to the previous question will shatter/weaken the conclusion. So, the correct answer choice would be any peace of evidence that talks about another factor that make workers increase productivity. For example: Drab room was small for 100 workers and this condition affected workers' performance.

Answer choice analysis  
A) The 50 workers moved to the brightly colored room performed precisely the same manufacturing task as the workers who remained in the drab workroom.  Opposite. This choice strengthens the conclusion in some way. It is telling us that increase of productivity was not because workers were given easier tasks. They performed same level of tasks. So conclusion holds true.

B) The drab workroom was designed to provide adequate space for at most 65 workers.  Correct. 
This choice provides an alternative reason why both groups of workers perform more productively. This choice suggests that since the drab workroom was overcrowded (max capacity of 65 < 100 actual number of workers), this condition affected workers' productivity. Once they were relieved, workers' productivity increased. So this choice is the weakener.

C) The 50 workers who moved to the brightly colored workroom were matched as closely as possible in age and level of training to the 50 workeres who remained in the drab workroom.   Irrelevant
I think that if both groups were balance or not in skills and ages, the argument tells us that both groups increased productivity.

D) Nearly all the workers in both groups as volunteered to move to the brightly colored workroom.  Irrelevant.

E) Many of the workers who moved to the brightly colored workroom as well as or better than they liked the brightly colored workroom.  Irrelevant. (although I think this option has grammar typos)
 The level of performance of a subset of the group of workers who moved to the colored room is not in discussion. Even if they performed better than the others, all workers increased productivity.

ishanjain126 · Answer

What the Argument Says: 
1. 50 workers moved to a new room.
2. Both groups saw productivity increases.
3. The conclusion is that the increase happened because researchers were paying attention to them.

Does B Weaken the Conclusion? 
1. If the drab room was overcrowded before and moving 50 people reduced overcrowding, it could explain why the remaining 50 workers also became more productive—not because of researcher attention, but because they had more space.
2. This would offer an alternative explanation for the productivity increase in the drab room, which does challenge the argument to some extent.

Why B Is Not the Best Answer:
 1. It doesn’t explain why the 50 workers who moved to the bright room also improved. The argument needs to explain both groups' increases in productivity.
2. Even if space was a factor for the workers who stayed in the drab room, it doesn’t directly counter the idea that researcher attention influenced both groups.

Why D Is Better: 
1. D suggests that nearly all workers volunteered for the move. This means the workers who moved were already more motivated, which provides an alternative reason why their productivity increased—completely independent of researchers' attention.
2. If productivity increases were due to pre-existing motivation, then the argument’s conclusion (that researchers' attention caused the boost) is weakened more directly than in B.

I feel  D  is the better choice

Parag030303 · Answer

KarishmaB   GMATNinja   ChiranjeevSingh ,

In this CR question about workers moved from a drab room to a brightly colored room, both groups increased productivity and the author concluded this was due to the researchers’ interest. The official answer is B: the drab room was designed for only 65 workers, so moving 50 out gave more space.

My confusion is between C and B.

My logic for C: It says the two groups were matched in age and training level. I thought this explains why both groups had similar skill sets and therefore performed similarly and improved equally. I am not sure why this reasoning is considered wrong — where exactly am I misunderstanding?

My logic for B: It says the drab room was designed for 65 workers, so giving more space might explain the productivity boost. But does having more space really guarantee that workers will perform better? For example, if a student gets a bigger study room, does that automatically mean better results? Because of this, I was not convinced B is correct.

Can someone please clarify: why exactly is my reasoning with C incorrect, and why is B considered the right weakening answer?

ChiranjeevSingh · Answer

Let's say A and B are similar. I give a candy to B. B improves in performance. Makes sense - the candy had an effect.

However, A also improves in performance. Why? I didn't give candy to A.

If A and B are similar and I give candy only to B, I wouldn't expect A to improve. Right? Option C doesn't explain why the group staying in the drab room improved.

Are we looking for a guarantee in this question? If we are, why didn't you reject option C also for the same reason? Is there a guarantee there?

It's exremely common for people to look for guarantees in strengthen/weaken questions. And people do that "inconsistently" - in other words, they look for guarantees only in some options.

KarishmaB · Answer

Study: 50 of 100 factory workers were moved from their drab workroom to brightly colored workroom. Observation: All workers increased their productivity, Conclusion: The increase in productivity took place because of the interest taken by the researchers in the work of both groups. Pay attention to the conclusion. What does it say? It says that the cause of increase in productivity was the interest of the researchers. How will we weaken it? By saying that the cause could be something else. (A) The 50 workers moved to the brightly colored room performed precisely the same manufacturing task as the workers who remained in the drab workroom. Irrelevant whether their tasks were same or different. We know that all showed increased productivity in their own tasks. The point is why did productivity increase? (B) The drab workroom was designed to provide adequate space for at most 65 workers. Makes sense. This gives us a possible different reason for increased productivity - Increase in space available to all 100 workers. (C) the 50 workers who moved to the brightly colored workroom were matched as closely as possible in age and level of training to the 50 workeres who remained in the drab workroom. Irrelevant whether their ages and training were similar. Their productivity increased. Our question is - why? (D) Nearly all the workers in both groups had volunteered to move to the brightly colored workroom. Again, no indication of a different reason for increased productivity. (E) Many of the workers who moved to the brightly colored workroom reported that they liked the drab workroom as well as or better than they liked the brightly colored workroom. Again, no indication of a different reason for increased productivity. Which room which workers liked better doesn't matter. Everyone's productivity increased when some were moved to another room. Why? Note here that the 'drab vs brightly colored room' comparison is just an eyewash in this question. Answer (B) Discussion on Weaken Questions: https://youtu.be/EhZ8FKkfy0k

In a study of the effect of color on productivity, 50 of 100 factory

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

In a study of the effect of color on productivity, 50 of 100 factory

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards