Candidate A was widely believed to be the favorite in her state’s gube

Question

Candidate A was widely believed to be the favorite in her state’s gubernatorial race. Candidate B, the incumbent governor, had figured prominently in a corruption scandal during the previous year. Although he was ultimately never charged with a crime, Candidate B received very negative coverage in local and national media. A poll of registered voters in the state showed that a majority supported Candidate A and would vote for her. In fact, election day “exit polls” of those who voted showed that most had voted for Candidate A, and so she was expected to win. However, once the votes were counted, Candidate B was shown to have won a narrow victory. Clearly, respondents to the polls were not being honest when they claimed to have supported Candidate A.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

A. It is difficult to predict the degree to which an incumbent candidate’s support will be affected by negative media coverage.

B. The negative media coverage made supporters of Candidate B reluctant to express their views in public, and so they claimed to support Candidate A when they actually had voted for Candidate B.

C. No voter ever changes his or her mind about whom to vote for.

D. Candidate B successfully used the fact that he had not been charged with a crime to restore his good image with the voting public.

E. The sample of voters surveyed in the exit poll was representative of those who voted

sun01 · Answer

Candidate A was widely believed to be the favorite in her state’s gubernatorial race. Candidate B, the incumbent governor, had figured prominently in a corruption scandal during the previous year. Although he was ultimately never charged with a crime, Candidate B received very negative coverage in local and national media. A poll of registered voters in the state showed that a majority supported Candidate A and would vote for her. In fact, election day “exit polls” of those who voted showed that most had voted for Candidate A, and so she was expected to win. However, once the votes were counted, Candidate B was shown to have won a narrow victory. Clearly, respondents to the polls were not being honest when they claimed to have supported Candidate A.

Conclusion: respondents to the polls were not being honest when they claimed to have supported Candidate A.

Premises leading to conclusion : once the votes were counted, Candidate B was shown to have won a narrow victory. This sentence follows the premise stating that election day “exit polls” of those who voted showed that most had voted for Candidate A, and so she was expected to win.

What could be the assumption of argument?

The author thinks that exit polls included the opinion of the voters who participated in the election.

The choices are :

1. It is difficult to predict the degree to which an incumbent candidate’s support will be affected by negative media coverage.

some sort of inference. So, not in race.

2.The negative media coverage made supporters of Candidate B reluctant to express their views in public, and so they claimed to support Candidate A when they actually had voted for Candidate B.

It strengthens the conclusion.

3.No voter ever changes his or her mind about whom to vote for. : Opposite of conclusion.

4. Candidate B successfully used the fact that he had not been charged with a crime to restore his good image with the voting public. - not an assumption

5. The sample of voters surveyed in the exit poll was representative of those who voted: This is an assumption made by author. if u negate it, it will destroy conclusion saying that respondents to the polls were not being honest when they claimed to have supported Candidate A.

Kurtosis · Answer

Premise: Candidate A was expected to win the elections as majority supported Candidate A. But Candidate B won the election by a narrow margin despite receiving negative media coverage.
Conclusion: Respondents to the poll were dishonest

A. It is difficult to predict the degree to which an incumbent candidate’s support will be affected by negative media coverage. - Incorrect - Irrelevant

B. The negative media coverage made supporters of Candidate B reluctant to express their views in public, and so they claimed to support Candidate A when they actually had voted for Candidate B. - Hold

C. No voter ever changes his or her mind about whom to vote for. - Incorrect - Opposite

D. Candidate B successfully used the fact that he had not been charged with a crime to restore his good image with the voting public. - Incorrect - Out of scope.

E. The sample of voters surveyed in the exit poll was representative of those who voted - Hold

Now, between B and E, Negate B: it attacks the premise of the argument instead of invalidating the conclusion. Negate E: If the sample of voters surveyed was not representative of those who voted, then the conclusion that respondents to the poll were dishonest breaks down. The respondents may have voted for A, but since the survey was not representative a wide majority could have voted for B.

Answer: E

demonawaits · Answer

Hi everyone,

Could someone help me understand why C isn't the answer? Author's conclusion is that the voters were dishonest. Now, if I negate option C, it would mean some of the voters dichallengd change their mind?

Hence, wouldn't that break the conclusion. Though I know E sounds a better option, I'm still not able to get my head around c.

daboo343 · Answer

Option E is assumption
let's negate the option E The sample of voters surveyed in the exit poll was not representative of those who voted.
on negatine we see that the negated option E shatters the conclusion
Hence E is ans

rhine29388 · Answer

Conclusion - Respondents to the poll were not being honest
option A is irrelevant to the topic in discussion
option D is completely out of scope 
option C tells us exactly opposite of what the conclusion states
between option B and E , if we negate each of them we see that B doesn't break the conclusion,it infact strengthen the conclusion
after negating option E the conclusion falls apart
correct answer - E

Konstantin1983 · Answer

If you negate option C you get that "some voters can change their minds". But this doesn't break the argument since the conclusion states that "voters were dishonest" i.e they said one thing and voted the other way. Hope it is clear!

amarinetti · Answer

Also there were exit polls, made after the voting. Someone could't be able to change his mind after the voting is already done. It could be true to the previous polls only, but not for the exit polls.

chesstitans · Answer

The question is quite long, but there are not so many hard and confusing details in the question. In other words, the argument can be paraphrased, and summarized. Nevertheless, it still takes 2.5 min to find the correct answer. 
A. It is difficult to predict the degree to which an incumbent candidate’s support will be affected by negative media coverage. -> weaken
B. The negative media coverage made supporters of Candidate B reluctant to express their views in public, and so they claimed to support Candidate A when they actually had voted for Candidate B. -> explanation

No voter ever changes his or her mind about whom to vote for. -> does not help

Candidate B successfully used the fact that he had not been charged with a crime to restore his good image with the voting public. -> out of scope

E. The sample of voters surveyed in the exit poll was representative of those who voted -> directly link with the argument -> correct

poojachaudhary0305 · Answer

If we negate C we get - Some/all voters did change their mind. Which means that they weren't being dishonest they simply changed their mind! 
I am still not fully convinced - why not C?

carcass  any help?

Carcass · Answer

No,

they simply changed their opinion. Which is normal that happens.

The assumption instead in that the survey is reliable and truthfully.

C is wrong, it says nothing about

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

STEP 1: IDENTIFY THE QUESTION TYPE

This question directs you to find an assumption on which the argument depends, so this is definitely an Assumption question.

STEP 2: UNTANGLE THE STIMULUS

The argument concludes that respondents to recent election exit polls and apreelection polls were not being honest when they claimed to have supported Candidate A for governor. The evidence for this is that despite a strong showing in these polls, Candidate A still lost the election.

STEP 3: PREDICT THE ANSWER

This conclusion is based in part on the results of two polls, so those polls need to have been conducted with representative samples in order for the conclusion to be valid. After all, what if the polls had both been conducted outside campaign rallies for Candidate A or in Candidate A’s hometown? The sample group for the polls needs to be an adequate cross section of the voting population, and since this argument stakes its conclusion on the polls, the author of the argument must be assuming that the sample is indeed representative.

This question shows you that Kaplan’s strategy for representativeness is not restricted to Strengthen and Weaken questions. On Test Day, if you’re asked an Assumption question and you notice that the stimulus focuses on a study, survey, poll, or experiment, know that a choice that essentially says,  “The sample was representative”  is likely to be correct.

STEP 4: EVALUATE THE CHOICES

(E)  matches this prediction perfectly and is the correct answer. If you used the Denial Test to negate  (E) , by stating that the poll’s sample group was not representative, then the author’s conclusion that voters must have lied can no longer be valid. If the people who participated in the polls were not representative of the larger voting population, then there would be no particular reason to expect the poll and voting results to be similar.  (E)  is therefore a necessary assumption of the argument.

(A)  is not necessary to the argument because the author doesn’t base her conclusion on a prediction drawn from the press coverage. Rather, the author bases her conclusion on a prediction drawn from the polling data.

(B),  if true, would strengthen the argument, but this isn’t a Strengthen question; the right answer to an Assumption question must be something upon which the argument relies. While the argument asserts that people polled lied about whom they voted for, it does not depend on any particular reason why they
did so.

(C)  is far too extreme; the argument’s point that the polls’ respondents lied is not undone if one or two people simply changed their minds.

As for  (D) , the author doesn’t necessarily assume anything about how Candidate B was able to eke out a victory.

Answer: E

Hope it helps

GDT · Answer

Can someone pls explain how the negated version of B does not weaken the conclusion

It should be something like supporters of B did not lie about whom they voted for - So, our concl that people must have lied is weakened

Sateni7628 · Answer

I would like to add my two cents about why choice C is wrong. 
 Conclusion: Voters in the survey were dishonest or lied.
 
C. No voter ever changes his or her mind about whom to vote for.

Per this choice, any voter sticks to his/her conscious about whom to vote.

Apply negation technique:
 Some voters change their minds about whom they vote for.

Whether some voters change their minds before voting need not have any relation with whether those who surveyed will be honest. In fact, those who change their preferences about whom to vote for could very well lie about who they are going to vote for when surveyed.

Posted from my mobile device

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

Hi

You are correct - negation of option (B) does in fact weaken the conclusion. However, as the OE points out, this option acts as a strengthener for the conclusion. The negation technique is applicable for both Find the Assumption as well as Strengthen the Conclusion type of questions. Therefore, for this particular question, where we are required to find an underlying assumption, (B) is not the correct answer even though the negation technique appears to give an affirmative response.

To be sure, negation of option (E) also weakens the conclusion (if the sample of voters surveyed  was not  representative of those who voted, then their responses cannot indicate an expectation for B to win, and hence we cannot say that those polled lied).

Hope this helps.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Candidate A was widely believed to be the favorite in her state’s gube

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

Candidate A was widely believed to be the favorite in her state’s gube

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