The editor of Metathesis, a new academic journal of literature,

Question

The editor of Metathesis, a new academic journal of literature, manages the peer-review of articles submitted for publication. The journal accepts articles focusing on any of three general subject areas: comparative literature, modernist literature, and postcolonial literature.

When an article is submitted, the editor has the article peer-reviewed by exactly three experts, none of whom authored or coauthored the article. The table (see the Reviewers/Authors tab) consists of all the authors or coauthors who have recently submitted articles and all the experts who currently peer-review or have recently peer-reviewed those articles. It also lists the general subject areas for each of the authors and reviewers.

Each author of each submitted article specializes in the general subject area of the article. Moreover, each recently submitted article was peer-reviewed by experts listed in the table.The following are the requirements adhered to in the peer-review of articles recently submitted to the journal:

- Each submitted article must be peer-reviewed by two primary reviewers and one secondary reviewer.
- The specialization of the primary reviewers must be in the general subject area of the submitted article.
- The specialization of the secondary reviewer must be in a general subject area different from that of the submitted article.
- None of the reviewers of a submitted article may have the same institutional affiliation as the article’s author.Scholar 
 Institutional   Affiliation 
 Specialization   (General Subject Area) 
 
  Amaro 
 ABC University 
 Comparative 
 
  Borsky 
 PQR University 
 Modernist 
 
  DiNapoli 
 XYZ University 
 Postcolonial 
 
  Farkas 
 ABC University 
 Postcolonial 
 
  Huang 
 PQR University 
 Comparative 
 
  Kenyatta 
 PQR University 
 Modernist 
 
  Laprade 
 ABC University 
 Comparative 
 
  Nichols 
 XYZ University 
 Modernist 
 
  Poundstone 
 ABC University 
 Modernist

chetan2u · Answer

The three tabs give us the following info:

Journal : The editor has the article peer-reviewed by exactly three experts, none of whom authored or coauthored the article.

Review Rules :
- Each submitted article must be peer-reviewed by two primary reviewers and one secondary reviewer.
- The specialization of the primary reviewers must be in the general subject area of the submitted article.
- The specialization of the secondary reviewer must be in a general subject area different from that of the submitted article.
- None of the reviewers of a submitted article may have the same institutional affiliation as the article’s author.

Reviews/Authors : This gives the details of each author.

Question 1. Suppose that Borsky has recently authored an article that has been peer-reviewed by Metathesis. With this supposition, the information provided does NOT imply that which one of the following is FALSE?

Look for an option that need not be false, and scan the tab 3 keeping in mind the rules given in tab 2.

Borsky - PQR University - Modernist:   So,  reviewers cannot be from PQR university  ,  so only ABC and XYZ left.... Anyone with PQR university has to be false, and will not be the answer. 
  Eliminate  the options that have authors  Huang  and  Kenyatta  as they both are from PQR university.

Poundstone was a primary reviewer and   Kenyatta   the secondary reviewer.
Nichols was a primary reviewer and   Kenyatta   the secondary reviewer.
  Kenyatta   was a primary reviewer and Nichols the secondary reviewer.
 Nichols was a primary reviewer and Farkas the secondary reviewer....CORRECT 
Poundstone was a primary reviewer and   Huang   the secondary reviewer.

Question 2. Suppose that all three reviewers for a certain recently submitted article were from the same university. For each of the following statements, select Consistent if the supposition, together with the information provided, does NOT imply that the statement is FALSE. Otherwise, select Not consistent.

Look for an option that need not be false, and scan the tab 3 keeping in mind the rules given in tab 2.

As there are three reviewers, authors from XYZ would not fit in  as there are only two of them.

#  Amaros was a primary reviewer of the article:   Can be true , as there are three from the ABC institution, and two different specializations are available. Laprade could be other primary reviewer and Farkas or Pounstone could be the secondary reviewer.
#  Huang was the secondary reviewer of the article : The primary reviewer could be Borsky and Kenyatta who are from same institution but different field of specialization.  Can be true 
#  Huang was the author of the article : Then Amaros and Laprade could be the primary reviewer and Farkas or Pounstone could be the secondary reviewer.. .Can be true

Question 3. Suppose that Farkas and Kenyatta were both selected as reviewers for a certain recently submitted article. For each of the following statements, select Yes if the statement must be true, based on this supposition and the information provided. Otherwise, select No.

Farkas - ABC University - Postcolonial
Kenyatta - PQR University - Modernist
 Analysis 
(a) Thus, an author from XYZ institution is the author and has a field of specialization from Post-colonial or Modernist.
(b) Also the third reviewer has to be from these two specialization.

#  Laprade was not a reviewer of the article:  Not from Post-colonial or Modernist.  Hence yes, ..point (b) above. 
#  Farkas was a primary reviewer of the article:   Need not be true.  Depends on who the author is.... Hence, no 
#  Borsky was the secondary reviewer of the article :  Need not be true.  Depends on who the author is.... Hence, no

Purnank · Answer

Make matrix like below and compare it with conditions in the question stem and solve.

Categories \ Universities         ABC           PQR          XYZ

Comparitive                          A, L             H
Modernist                               P              B, K           N
Postcolonial                            F                               D

Araevin · Answer

In the 3rd Question, reasoning for the last two statements can be more comprehensive than “need not be true”, here’s the explanation

Statement 2 is definitely false. Because there are overall only two experts in Postcolonial which implies there can never be any postcolonial articles submitted for peer review because you need 2 other experts from the same field and a different university as primary reviewers. This in turn implies Postcolonial experts are always secondary reviewers. The introduction mentions that the list of reviewers and authors provided is exhaustive and there’s no other authors/reviewers.

Statements 3 is definitely false. Kenyatta is Modernist and Farkas is Postcolonial. If Borsky joins then he can only be a primary reviewer. Two from same expertise are primary reviewers. There’s never two secondary reviewers because there’s always exactly 3 reviewers.

naveeng15 · Answer

(a) Thus, an author from XYZ institution is the author and has a field of specialization from Post-colonial or Modernist.
(b) Also the third reviewer has to be from these two specialization.

# Laprade was not a reviewer of the article: Not from Post-colonial or Modernist. Hence yes, ..point (b) above.
# Farkas was a primary reviewer of the article: Need not be true. Depends on who the author is....Hence, no
# Borsky was the secondary reviewer of the article: Need not be true. Depends on who the author is....Hence, no

MUB · Answer

Farkas or Pounstone could be the secondary reviewer.
how its subject is similar according to tab2 rule secondary reviewers have different subject....

MUB · Answer

can someone explain question 2 in easier way

Bunuel · Answer

Suppose that all three reviewers for a certain recently submitted article were from the same university. For each of the following statements, select Consistent if the supposition, together with the information provided, does NOT imply that the statement is FALSE. Otherwise, select Not consistent . https://gmatclub.com/forum/download/file.php?id=87469 Scholar Institutional Affiliation Specialization (General Subject Area) Amaro ABC University Comparative Borsky PQR University Modernist DiNapoli XYZ University Postcolonial Farkas ABC University Postcolonial Huang PQR University Comparative Kenyatta PQR University Modernist Laprade ABC University Comparative Nichols XYZ University Modernist Poundstone ABC University Modernist The question asks us to evaluate three statements about the reviewers of an article, given that all three reviewers are from the same university . The review rules state: 1. Each article has two primary reviewers and one secondary reviewer. 2. The primary reviewers must specialize in the same subject area as the article. 3. The secondary reviewer must specialize in a different subject area. 4. Reviewers also cannot share the same university as the author of the article. • Amaros was a primary reviewer of the article. Amaro (ABC University/Comparative literature) is a primary reviewer if the article is on Comparative literature. Laprade (ABC University/Comparative literature) could be the other primary reviewer. For the secondary reviewer, we could have Farkas (ABC University/Postcolonial literature) or Poundstone (ABC University/Modernist literature). The statement is consistent . • Huang was the secondary reviewer of the article. Huang (PQR University/Comparative literature) could be the secondary reviewer if the article is on a subject other than Comparative literature. The two other reviewers from PQR, Borsky (PQR University/Modernist literature) and Kenyatta (PQR University/Modernist literature), specialize in Modernist literature, so if the article is on Modernist literature, they could be the primary reviewers. Huang, specializing in Comparative literature, could then be the secondary reviewer. The statement is consistent . • Huang was the author of the article If Huang (PQR University/Comparative literature) is the author, the article must be on Comparative literature, as Huang specializes in this field. The three reviewers must not be from PQR University, as the author and reviewers cannot share the same university. Therefore, Amaro (ABC University/Comparative literature) and Laprade (ABC University/Comparative literature) could be the primary reviewers, both specializing in Comparative literature. For the secondary reviewer, we could have Farkas (ABC University/Postcolonial literature) or Poundstone (ABC University/Modernist literature), as the secondary reviewer must specialize in a different subject. The statement is consistent . GMAT-Club-Forum-xro8au3o.png

The editor of Metathesis, a new academic journal of literature,

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

Scholar	Institutional Affiliation	Specialization (General Subject Area)
Amaro	ABC University	Comparative
Borsky	PQR University	Modernist
DiNapoli	XYZ University	Postcolonial
Farkas	ABC University	Postcolonial
Huang	PQR University	Comparative
Kenyatta	PQR University	Modernist
Laprade	ABC University	Comparative
Nichols	XYZ University	Modernist
Poundstone	ABC University	Modernist

	Poundstone was a primary reviewer and Kenyatta the secondary reviewer.
	Nichols was a primary reviewer and Kenyatta the secondary reviewer.
	Kenyatta was a primary reviewer and Nichols the secondary reviewer.
	Nichols was a primary reviewer and Farkas the secondary reviewer.
	Poundstone was a primary reviewer and Huang the secondary reviewer.

Consistent	Not Consistent
		Amaros was a primary reviewer of the article.
		Huang was the secondary reviewer of the article.
		Huang was the author of the article

Yes	No
		Laprade was not a reviewer of the article
		Farkas was a primary reviewer of the article
		Borsky was the secondary reviewer of the article.

GMAT Multi-Source Reasoning (MSR) Questions

The editor of Metathesis, a new academic journal of literature,

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