Reviewers of Orville Dennison's first book on medieval art

Question

Reviewers of Orville Dennison's first book on medieval art have alleged a number of inaccuracies, but these charges are plainly absurd. Dennison has a long history of publishing magazine articles on art. No critic has found any errors in these publications. It is likely, then, that the critics of the book are wrong.

Which of the following would, if true, most seriously weaken the above argument?

A) Books on art tend to receive many more published reviews than do magazine articles on art.
B) Magazine articles tend to go through less rigorous prepublication fact-checking than do most books.
C) Magazine articles often draw from books for factual information.
D) Factual errors in books can be corrected more easily than errors in magazine articles.
E) Writings on medieval art appear more often in books than in magazines.

ChiranjeevSingh · Accepted Answer

I have mixed feelings about this question.
 
 I find option B beautiful because it is ABSOLUTELY wrong but is very attractive for many people. 
 I find option A a little difficult to digest. What works in favor of option A is that there is no other option that comes close.  
Why is option B wrong?

Because it strengthens the argument rather than weakening it.

Before we evaluate how option B strengthens, it's important to be aware that it talks about "prepublication fact-checking," i.e., fact-checking that happens before the publication. The argument is about finding inaccuracies AFTER the publication.

Now, let's understand how option strengthens the argument: If magazine articles tend to go through less rigorous pre-publication fact-checking and still (given that) no critic has found any errors in these publications, Dennison is really accurate about his stuff. Even where pre-publication fact-checking is not very rigorous, nobody finds errors in his articles. In this case, if someone finds errors in Dennison's books, which have gone through more rigorous fact-checking before publication, we'll have a tendency to believe that the person finding errors is wrong. Thus, the conclusion will be strengthened.

Why is option A correct?

If books receive more reviews than magazine articles, I have a reason to understand why Dennison's magazine articles were not pointed out for inaccuracies while his books are. Since books receive more reviews, they are more scrutinized or probed. Thus, it's more likely that inaccuracies in the books will be pointed out.

Why did I have mixed feelings about A?

Because the argument says, "No critic has found any errors in these publications (magazine articles)." If the argument had said, "Very rarely, a critic has found any error in these publications," I would not have much difficulty in selecting option A.

Why?

Option A says that books receive more reviews than magazine articles, so this could explain why more inaccuracies will be found in books than in magazine articles. However, I could not bring myself to see how this option could explain the difference between "ZERO errors" in magazine article to "a number of inaccuracies" in books. Regarless of this concern, I agree that option A is the best.

ankita3101 · Answer

Although I got my answer correct I was considering B for quite some time. My reasoning for not choosing it was that it has not been mentioned that critics found out factual inaccuracies. Other point is that critics are pointing out to inaccuracies despite good fact-checking processes in place.

Happy to understand this better.

Happy to understand this better.

Sk1003 · Answer

I think the most incorrect part of option B is the focus on "pre-publication" whereas the question stem focusses on critics pointing out errors post publication. So even if as per B, magazines have less rigorous fact checking processes compared to books, there should have been more errors pointed out by critics in magazines post publication too. But that doesn't happen, so the best weakener is A because it correctly points out that there are more reviews in books in general.

But I would also like to hear other experts' take on this. TIA

sachi-in · Answer

Such a nice gmat trap between A and B.

Prethinking:    Book - Errors  but  Magazines ( so many magazines yet ) - No Error  
Maybe there is a disparity in review , or maybe some other difference that has caused the error like writing a book is not like writing a magazine.

C, D, E doesn't talk about the differences so we can easily eliminate them.

A and B talks about discrepancy.

A talks about post-publication review
B talks about pre-publication review

Additionally B talks about generalized cases not art books / magazines.

In the passage we talk about reviewers of Orville's book ( the book is already published ) hence B out.

DreSanson · Answer

Conclusion: critics of the book are wrong.
Evidence/premisse: No critic has found any errors in these (magazine articles) publications.

Weaken the argument: Why would reviews on books be more accurate than in magazine articles? any answer that explain why books review standards are better than magazine, will help weaken the argument.

A) Books on art tend to receive many more published reviews than do magazine articles on art.  
Plausibe answers, because if books have many more reviews, it is plausible to infere that many more errors will be find in books, than it will in magazine reports. This answer strenght the quality of book reviews, therefore, weaken the argument. Keep.

B) Magazine articles tend to go through less rigorous prepublication fact-checking than do most books. 
This one can be tricky, but the main point is: *prepublication*. It if, otherwise, side after publication, it would be a plausible answer, because then we would assume that people dont find errors in magazine articles because they go through less rigorous fact checking. But, because it says before it is even publicated, it does not help me solve why books reviews find more errors than magazine articles. This actually can strenght the argument, because if MA have a less rigorous fact-checking, than you would assume that you would find more errors, and because you don't, the book reviews could be wrong.

C) Magazine articles often draw from books for factual information. 
Wrong. If magazine articles are based froom books, then magazine articles would have the same errors. It strenghts the argument.

D) Factual errors in books can be corrected more easily than errors in magazine articles. 
Wrong. So you would find more errors in magazine articles than in books. It strenghts the argument.

E) Writings on medieval art appear more often in books than in magazines. 
If you infere a lot of things, maybe this could be somewhat ok, to think that books have more writings, so would lead to more errors, than you would weaken the argument that magazine articles dont have any. But in the end, "more often" does not help us, how more often?.

As you can see, A is the best answer, because is strenght the argument of why more errors are find in books than in magazine articles, and therefore, weaken the argument of the author.

Siddharth17 · Answer

I eliminated the B option because it didn't give any idea on critics of magnize article publication. instead it talked about prepublication fact checking which I though was irrelevant. is this elimination correct? 
I

guddo · Answer

I’d say yes, your elimination of (B) is correct.

The argument relies on this point: no critic found errors in Dennison’s magazine articles. So the relevant question is whether those articles received enough  post-publication critical scrutiny  for errors to be noticed.

(B) talks about prepublication fact-checking. That does not address whether critics later reviewed the articles carefully. So it is not the best weakener.

(A) is better because fewer reviews of magazine articles means errors may simply have gone  undetected .

Reviewers of Orville Dennison's first book on medieval art

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

Reviewers of Orville Dennison's first book on medieval art

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