A study showed that, across a variety of office jobs, upgrades in aest

Question

A study showed that, across a variety of office jobs, upgrades in aesthetic ratings (as determined by an objective scale) to an office resulted in greater increases in productivity from full-time employees than from temporary employees working under limited contracts. Interpreting these results, sociologists hypothesize that full-time employees identify more with their workspace than do temporary employees, and thus see visual improvements in the offices as reflecting on the value of their own profession contribution.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the sociologists’ interpretation of the study?

A. Major ergonomic improvements to workstations result in productivity increases from all employees.

B. Many benefits, such as medical insurance and retirement benefits, are available to full-time employees and not to temporary employees.

C. After a significant aesthetic upgrades to an office, even full-time employees who report in surveys that the upgrade made “no difference” to them showed increases in productivity.

D. All scales for an employee’s perceived value to his company are correlated with the aesthetic rating of his office.

E. When a manager spends the extra money to beautify an office, she typically compliments employees by telling them that they’re worth the extra expense.

RiyaJain69 · Accepted Answer

This is only my day 2 of attempting CR questions. I took 2:44 to get to the correct answer.

Conclusion: sociologists hypothesize that full-time employees... see visual improvements in the offices as reflecting on the value of their own profession contribution.

Question type: Strengthen

Line of reasoning: Cause-Effect/Correlation
For full-time employees: Upgraded aesthetics --> Reflection of the value of their contribution

A) Irrelevant. It talks about ergonomic improvement, not aesthetics. And it talks about productivity, not employees' perception of their value. Thirdly, it talks about all employees whereas our conclusion is about full-timers alone.

B) Irrelevant. Perks of the job have nothing to do with upgrading aesthetics.

C) Trap! Sure, this option establishes that upgrading aesthetics improves full-timers' productivity. But our conclusion is not about productivity at all. Hence, this is not the correct answer.

E) Attractive option. A reasonable theory. Does strengthen the conclusion. Shortlist this.

D) We have to assume that the answer options are true--no matter how unrealistic they are--and then evaluate them. Read the conclusion. Now read option D again. Option D clearly establishes the correlation between aesthetics and employees' perception of their value to the company. This directly validates the main assumption of the argument and hence is the right answer.

If you are confused between D and E, here is why D is better: E says that office decoration  implies  that the company value employees but D says that decoration, as a matter of  fact , is related to the employees' value. Fact > Implication, hence D > E.

(P.S. Please wish me luck for my GMAT!)

PRNDL · Answer

In this question I think that there are two conclusions.
1. Full-time employees identify more with their workspace than do temporary employees, 
2. Full time employees see visual improvements in the offices as reflecting on the value of their own profession contribution.

How do we know which one to strengthen ?

RiyaJain69 · Answer

I understand your confusion. I too was there when I had just begun solving CR questions. Statement 1 (full-timers identify more with workplace than do temp. emp) is sub-conclusion. Statement 2 is the argument's main conclusion. You ask a valid question: how to identify which conclusion is the main one?

In this argument, the line of reasoning makes it evident that statement 1 (or conclusion 1) has been used to arrive at statement 2 (or the second conclusion). Essentially, statement serves as a premise.

Whenever an argument involves two conclusions, ask yourself what the main point of the argument is. Does it concern conclusion 1 or conclusion 2? The argument will always have enough indicators to tell which conclusion is the main conclusion.

gullyboy09 · Answer

Hi  KarishmaB , can you please help me understand D option here? I am not able to understand it correctly.

guddo · Answer

A study showed that, across a variety of office jobs, upgrades in aesthetic ratings (as determined by an objective scale) to an office resulted in greater increases in productivity from full-time employees than from temporary employees working under limited contracts. Interpreting these results, sociologists hypothesize that full-time employees identify more with their workspace than do temporary employees, and thus see visual improvements in the offices as reflecting on the value of their own profession contribution.
 
 Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the sociologists’ interpretation of the study?

The sociologists’ interpretation is that  full-time employees respond more strongly to office beautification because they identify more with the workspace and take the improvement as a sign that their own contribution is valued . So the best support is the choice that connects office aesthetics with employees’ sense of their own value to the company.

(A) Major ergonomic improvements to workstations result in productivity increases from all employees.

This is not the best support. It shows that functional improvements can raise productivity, but the sociologists’ claim is specifically about aesthetic improvements and employees’ identification with the workspace.

(B) Many benefits, such as medical insurance and retirement benefits, are available to full-time employees and not to temporary employees.

This may help explain why full-time employees feel more attached to the company in general, but it does not directly support the specific claim that aesthetic upgrades are interpreted as signals of the value of their contribution.

(C) After a significant aesthetic upgrades to an office, even full-time employees who report in surveys that the upgrade made “no difference” to them showed increases in productivity.

This supports the basic result of the study, but it does not strongly support the sociologists’ explanation of why the result occurs.

(D) All scales for an employee’s perceived value to his company are correlated with the aesthetic rating of his office.

This is the best answer. If employees’ sense of how much the company values them rises with the aesthetic quality of the office, that directly supports the idea that visual improvements are taken as reflecting the value of their contribution.

(E) When a manager spends the extra money to beautify an office, she typically compliments employees by telling them that they’re worth the extra expense.

This is tempting, but it introduces a different cause: the verbal compliment from the manager. The sociologists’ interpretation is that employees themselves infer value from the visual improvement, not that managers explicitly tell them so.

Answer: (D)

A study showed that, across a variety of office jobs, upgrades in aest

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

A study showed that, across a variety of office jobs, upgrades in aest

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