City resident: These new digital electronic billboards should be banne

Question

City resident: These new digital electronic billboards should be banned for light pollution since they are much too bright.

Outdoor advertising spokesperson: No, that's not true. Testing with a sophisticated light meter shows that at night they throw off less light than traditional billboards that are reflectively lit. Your mistaken perception that they are brighter comes from looking directly at the light source—the screen itself.

The underlying strategy of the spokesperson's response to the resident is most analogous to the underlying strategy of which of the following?

A. A doctor dismisses a patient's claim to have had a heart attack, citing a cardiac enzyme blood test.

B. A politician rejects an accusation of perjury by denying the credibility of witness testimony.

C. An insurance agent rejects a claim, on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence to support the claimant's testimony.

D. An investigator casts doubt on the results of a lie detector, citing the subject's report of illness during the test.

E. A psychologist treats a mental illness by encouraging a patient to abandon inconsistent beliefs.

CR46521.01

GMATIntensive · Accepted Answer

The Story

City resident: These new digital electronic billboards should be banned for light pollution since they are much too bright.  - The city resident suggests that the new digital electronic billboards be banned. The reason is that they cause light pollution (meaning pollution of light) since they are too bright.

Outdoor advertising spokesperson: No, that’s not true.  - The OAS challenges the city resident directly by saying what the resident has stated is not true. (the new billboards are not too bright, and thus do not cause light pollution.)

Testing with a sophisticated light meter shows that at night they throw off less light than traditional billboards that are reflectively lit.  - OAS supports his challenge by citing data from a sophisticated light meter. The meter shows that the new electronic billboards throw less light than traditional billboards that are reflectively lit (here’s an indication that the new digital billboards are not reflectively lit)

Your mistaken perception that they are brighter comes from looking directly at the light source—the screen itself.  - OAS says that the resident’s misperception (that the new digital billboards are brighter than the traditional ones) arises since the resident looks directly at the light source i.e. the screen. (If the resident had not looked at the screen directly and instead focussed on the light ‘thrown off’, he might have correctly observed that the new digital billboards are less bright than the traditional ones)

Gist:  
The city resident suggests that the new digital billboard be banned since they are too bright. OAS challenges the observation that the new billboards are too bright by quoting a meter reading that shows that the new billboards are less bright than the traditional ones. OAS says that the reason for the resident’s misperception is that the resident looks directly at the screen.

The Goal     
The options are going to present strategies followed by different persons while dealing with certain situations. We have to find an option that presents a strategy most analogous to the strategy of the OAS’s response to the resident. What is the strategy of OAS? He counters the resident’s claim by citing a fact (meter reading) and by presenting an alternate reason (other than the reason that the new digital billboards are brighter) for the resident’s perception.

The Evaluation     
 A. A doctor dismisses a patient's claim to have had a heart attack, citing a cardiac enzyme blood test. 
  Correct  . Here, a patient ‘feels’ a heart attack. The doctor dismisses the claim citing a reading. In the given passage, the resident felt that the new billboards were brighter. The OAS, however, dismissed his claim citing a meter reading.

B. A politician rejects an accusation of perjury by denying the credibility of witness testimony. 
  Incorrect  . Here, a politician rejects the accusation of perjury by saying that the witness is lying. The OAS does say that what the resident has said is not true. However, a couple of things differ from this option. First, the OAS doesn’t really say that the resident is lying. Rather, he says that it’s a misperception of the resident since he is looking at the screen directly and not at the light thrown off. Secondly, he quotes some data point to support his point. In this option, the politician doesn’t offer any data point.

C. An insurance agent rejects a claim, on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence to support the claimant's testimony. 
  Incorrect  . Here, an insurance agent rejects a claim on the grounds of insufficient evidence. This was not the case with OAS. He didn’t argue that the resident didn’t have sufficient evidence.

D. An investigator casts doubt on the results of a lie detector, citing the subject's report of illness during the test. 
  Incorrect  . This option is actually in the opposite direction. Here, an investigator doubts a data point (results of a lie detector) by citing another data point (subject’s report of illness). Nowhere does OAS challenge any data point cited by the resident. The resident just presents his perception, which the OAS challenges.

E. A psychologist treats a mental illness by encouraging a patient to abandon inconsistent beliefs. 
  Incorrect  . This option presents a way a psychologist treats a patient’s mental illness. The option doesn’t talk about any challenge to a perception and is thus nowhere related to the given passage.

Additional Notes

SC Notes: 
“Your mistaken perception that they are brighter comes from …” – The subject for the verb ‘comes’ is ‘your mistaken perception’. As is quite common, a phrase (and even a clause) can very well act as a subject.

If you have any doubts regarding any part of this solution, please feel free to ask.

GMATNinja · Answer

It's really rare to see a question like this on the modern-day GMAT (there are very few GMAT CR questions that ask for "analogous" strategies or parallel reasoning). So we wouldn't recommend developing an elaborate strategy to deal with this exact question type.

That being said, you can approach this question just like any other CR question: first, break down the structure of the passage. Since there are two speakers in this passage, break each section down separately:

City Resident
  The city resident  concludes  that the "new digital electronic billboards should be banned for light pollution." 
 His/her  evidence to support this conclusion  is that the billboards "are much too bright."

Outdoor Advertising Spokesperson (OAS):
  The OAS  concludes  that, "no, that's not true."  
 The OAS's  evidence to support this conclusion  is that: "Testing with a sophisticated light meter shows that at night they throw off less light than traditional billboards that are reflectively lit." 
 The OAS offers  additional support  by saying that "Your mistaken perception that they are brighter comes from looking directly at the light source—the screen itself."

Overall, we can see that the city resident and OAS disagree about whether digital billboards are too bright, and therefore whether these billboards should be banned. The OAS cites an objective test (results from the "sophisticated light meter") to undermine the city resident's evidence, and thus his/her conclusion.

Which answer choice captures this strategy?
 
Here, the doctor uses an objective test to undermine the patient's claim. Seems pretty close to the OAS's strategy, so keep (A) for now.

The politician doesn't offer any objective test or data to explain why witness testimony isn't credible. The objective test is key to the OAS's strategy, so (B) is pretty far off the mark.

Eliminate (B).

The OAS doesn't say that there's  insufficient  evidence to support the city resident's claim -- instead, he/she brings NEW evidence that shows that the city resident's perception is off.

(C) is out.

In (D), the investigator argues  against  the results of a test. In the passage, the OAS  uses  the results of a test to support his/her point.

Eliminate (D).

"Inconsistent beliefs" would be beliefs that don't match with one another -- for instance, if a person believes that it's both raining and not raining at the same time in the same place.

The OAS doesn't imply that the city resident has inconsistent, or conflicting, beliefs. Instead, he/she argues that the city resident's  single  belief is incorrect.

(E) is out, and (A) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!

achbaa · Answer

A. You dismiss a claim by relying on some scientific evidence related to that claim.

Posted from my mobile device

ArtVandaley · Answer

Here is how I understood the question.

Resident:- Digital Billboards(DB) should be banned for light pollution

Spokesperson: No. They are actually better than the traditional Billboard(TB).

Flaw:- Even though the DB are better than TB, DB can still be banned for light pollution. Saying that DB is better than TB provides no ground for concluding that DB shouldnt be banned.

Things I looked for in an answer stem. :- Something that says A is better than B, hence A is good(or we should keep A).

Couldnt find anything similar on this front. Arrived at A using the force of elimination.

gmatt1476 · Answer

Official Explanation

Argument Construction

This question requires us to identify the answer choice that that has an underlying reasoning strategy that is most analogous to the spokesperson's strategy.

The outdoor advertising spokesperson responds to the city resident by citing an objective test that shows the factual claims of the resident to be false.

A. Correct. This choice is the most closely analogous to the spokesperson's strategy: the doctor uses an objective test to show the factual claims of the patient to be false.

B. The politician does not use an objective test to reject the accusation of perjury. The politician merely denies the credibility of the witness; the basis for this denial is not stated.

C. The insurance agent does not use an objective test as justification for rejecting a claim or for suggesting that there is sufficient evidence for the claimant's testimony.

D. In this choice, the investigator rejects the results of what some might see as an objective test. However, the investigator does not use the results of an objective test to prove the factual claims of the subject to be incorrect.

E. This choice does not involve rejecting a claim, nor does it involve any sort of objective test.

The correct answer is A.

moonriver0523 · Answer

A patient subjectively claims to have had heart attack.
A doctor cites objective test result to dismiss the claim.

City resident subjectively claims that the billboard is too bright.
Spokesperson cites objective report to dismiss the claim.

As I recall, dismiss means stop to consider something because it is unworthy. Does the spokesperson mention that the resident’s subjective perception is unworthy to consider? On the contrary, the spokesperson shows that the resident’s perception is ‘less objective’ than the testing report, and contend that the subjective perception can happen in certain condition. The subjective-objective is the backbone of the reasoning. Can you consider a thing and, at the same time, say it is unworthy to consider?

Medical tests are in general solid enough to confirm that the patient did not have heart attack. So the ‘dismiss’ in option (A) is reasonable. On the other hand, is the report the spokesperson cites solid enough to confirm that the resident’s subjective perception is false? Does the spokesperson put the resident in the MRI to analyze solid scientific data which may indicate that the billboard is not too bright to the resident?

I bet even elementary school student can draw better analogy than this set of question.

Ranasaymon · Answer

I was stuck between option A and D. After reviewing the analysis, I have come through a solution.

City resident gives a claim. OAS rejects the claim, cites a test result and considers alternative reasoning for that claim.

Goal:  Look for an option that will reject other claim by citing a test result.

Option D casts doubt on the findings and submits another findings. It does not go with our reasoning.
Option A matches with our goal. A doctor rejects a patient's claim by citing blood test.

Pritishd · Answer

Took me 4 mins to solve this one, but got it right. Below is how I approached it,

Structure of the conversation between the resident and the spokesperson 
1.   A claim is made by person X   - These new digital electronic billboards should be banned for light pollution since they are much too bright
2.   Factual evidence is presented by person Y to refute X's claim   - Testing with a sophisticated light meter shows that at night they throw off less light than traditional billboards that are reflectively lit

A. A doctor dismisses a patient's claim to have had a heart attack, citing a cardiac enzyme blood test 
A claim is made by person X - Patient claims that he/she had an heart attack
Factual evidence is presented by person Y to refute X's claim - Doctor refutes the claim by citing the results of the blood test

B. A politician rejects an accusation of perjury by denying the credibility of witness testimony 
This option does not fit the 2nd point from the structure, as the politician does not provide any factual evidence to reject the accusation and rather questions the credibility of the witness's claim

C. An insurance agent rejects a claim, on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence to support the claimant's testimony 
This option does not fit the 2nd point from the structure, as the agent does not provide any factual evidence to reject the claim

D. An investigator casts doubt on the results of a lie detector, citing the subject's report of illness during the test 
This one is a tricky one to eliminate. But this one does not fit the 2nd point from the structure. In the original structure the spokesperson out-rightly rejects the resident's claim and does not doubt it, whereas in this option the investigator doubts rather than reject the results

E. A psychologist treats a mental illness by encouraging a patient to abandon inconsistent beliefs 
This one is the easiest to eliminate as it is clear that it does not fit the structure mentioned above

Ans.  A

hemantbafna · Answer

The underlying strategy of the spokesperson's response to the resident is most analogous to the underlying strategy of which of the following?

A. A doctor dismisses a patient's claim to have had a heart attack, citing a cardiac enzyme blood test.

Best option after eliminating the rest.

B. A politician rejects an accusation of perjury by denying the credibility of witness testimony.

Nothing is discussed about credibility of the residents .

C. An insurance agent rejects a claim, on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence to support the claimant's testimony.

No discussion about insufficient evidence .

D. An investigator casts doubt on the results of a lie detector, citing the subject's report of illness during the test.

Not related is the reasoning.

E. A psychologist treats a mental illness by encouraging a patient to abandon inconsistent beliefs.

The spokesperson does not tell the residents to abandon the thought.

Therefore A is the best answer after eliminating the rest.

mk96 · Answer

GMATNinja  - boss, tell me how should one handle such questions? It get really confusing to pick answers in such questions. Can you please explain how would you approach this one?
TY
MK96

Elyazid · Answer

Hello  GMATNinja

I can't see why (B) is incorrect,isn't this phrase "Your mistaken perception that they are brighter comes from looking directly at the light source" denying the credibility of witness testimony?

GMATNinja · Answer

The spokesperson doesn't just deny the resident's claim -- he disproves the claim by referencing "testing with a sophisticated light meter."

In other words, he has concrete evidence showing that the claim is inaccurate. If (B) had mentioned  concrete evidence  that undermined the credibility of the witness, well, that would seem pretty good. But simply denying the credibility without any reference to evidence? Nah.

Contrast that with (A), in which we have a blood test as proof that the patient is wrong. Pretty concrete evidence there. So it's a better answer.

I hope that helps!

gmatimothy · Answer

ujjalpatra3 · Answer

Hi GMATNinja,
 As per sentence structure of answer option A, the doctor cited the test as an effect of dismissal of the patient's claim. But as per the original argument the OAS presented the test before making his conclusion. So in that case how this analogy works. Please clarify.

GMATNinja · Answer

Consider the logic of the initial exchange. The resident  perceives  that the billboard is too bright. The spokesperson then rebuts this perception by providing an objective test: a light meter.

This is the same dynamic we get in (A). The patient  perceives  that he's had a heart attack. The doctor then rebuts this perception by providing the enzyme test.

So the timing of the tests isn't what's important. It's that the tests were used as evidence against a faulty perception in both cases. (And no other answer choice gives us anything close to a scenario of a misconception being cleared up by a test.)

Even if you don't think (A) is perfect, it’s still the best of the bunch.

I hope that helps!

ArnauG · Answer

The underlying strategy of the spokesperson's response to the resident is most analogous to the underlying strategy of:

A. A doctor dismisses a patient's claim to have had a heart attack, citing a cardiac enzyme blood test.

In both scenarios, the spokesperson and the doctor are using objective measurements or evidence to challenge the subjective perception or claim of the other person. The spokesperson uses the results from the light meter testing to counter the resident's perception of the billboards being too bright, while the doctor uses the cardiac enzyme blood test to challenge the patient's claim of having had a heart attack. Both are relying on objective data to support their counter-arguments.

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.

City resident: These new digital electronic billboards should be banne

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

City resident: These new digital electronic billboards should be banne

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