Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
May 0510:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
GMAT Inequalities is a high-frequency topic in GMAT Quant, but many students struggle because the concepts behave differently from standard algebra. Understanding the right rules, patterns, and edge cases can significantly improve both speed and accuracy.- May 06
08:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
In Episode 3 of our GMAT Ninja Critical Reasoning series, we tackle Discrepancy, Paradox, and Explain an Oddity questions. You know the feeling: the passage gives you two facts that seem completely contradictory.... - May 08
08:00 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Join the special YouTube live-stream for selecting the winners of GMAT Club MBA Scholarships sponsored by Juno live. Watch who gets these coveted MBA scholarships offered by GMAT Club and Juno.
14 Aug 2025, 08:40
Kudos
Bookmarks
Medical Researcher: Among adults over 75, 62 percent of those who suffered three or more falls in the last 12 months walked unsteadily because of joint stiffness and age-related muscle loss, not because of neurological decline. Therefore, clinicians should no longer regard a history of frequent falls as evidence that neurological degeneration is beginning.
The researcher's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
A. Assumes proving many falls have another cause shows falls never indicate neurological decline.
B. Ignores that stiff joints and early neurological decline could coexist in some patients.
C. Takes for granted that “three or more falls” captures every clinically meaningful fall pattern.
D. Presumes the 62 percent figure is inherently large enough to overturn the diagnostic link.
E. Overlooks that participants may have been selected precisely because of musculoskeletal problems.
The researcher's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
A. Assumes proving many falls have another cause shows falls never indicate neurological decline.
B. Ignores that stiff joints and early neurological decline could coexist in some patients.
C. Takes for granted that “three or more falls” captures every clinically meaningful fall pattern.
D. Presumes the 62 percent figure is inherently large enough to overturn the diagnostic link.
E. Overlooks that participants may have been selected precisely because of musculoskeletal problems.
14 Aug 2025, 08:40
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Medical Researcher: Among adults over 75, 62 percent of those who suffered three or more falls in the last 12 months walked unsteadily because of joint stiffness and age-related muscle loss, not because of neurological decline. Therefore, clinicians should no longer regard a history of frequent falls as evidence that neurological degeneration is beginning.
The researcher's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
A. Assumes proving many falls have another cause shows falls never indicate neurological decline.
B. Ignores that stiff joints and early neurological decline could coexist in some patients.
C. Takes for granted that “three or more falls” captures every clinically meaningful fall pattern.
D. Presumes the 62 percent figure is inherently large enough to overturn the diagnostic link.
E. Overlooks that participants may have been selected precisely because of musculoskeletal problems.
Conclusion: Clinicians should no longer treat a history of frequent falls as evidence that neurological degeneration is starting.
Key Premise: In a study of adults over 75, sixty-two percent of those who had three or more falls in the past year fell because of joint stiffness and muscle loss, not neurological decline.
Unstated Assumption: If many cases of a symptom turn out to have an alternative cause, the symptom can no longer serve as evidence for the original condition in any case.
Logical Flaw: The argument over-generalizes from “many” to “never.” Showing that an alternative cause is common does not prove the original cause is never present.
(A) Correct. The conclusion assumes that just because we observe many instances of falls as the result of another cause, makes the symptom (falls) irrelevant or even useless as evidence of the neurological condition. This is the flaw.
(B) Incorrect. Patients might have both joint problems and early neurological decline, which even if true, does not point out the logical flaw going from many to never, and thus is irrelevant to our argument.
(C) Incorrect. The reasoning error persists regardless of the threshold, so this misses the point.
(D) Incorrect. Sample size is an unrelated issue, and thus the core logical leap would be unsound even with a larger percentage.
(E) Incorrect. Sampling bias would weaken the study's generalizability, yet the leap from many to never would still be flawed even with a perfect sample.
Therefore, (A) is the only option that directly targets the argument’s central vulnerability.
Answer: A
Medical Researcher: Among adults over 75, 62 percent of those who suffered three or more falls in the last 12 months walked unsteadily because of joint stiffness and age-related muscle loss, not because of neurological decline. Therefore, clinicians should no longer regard a history of frequent falls as evidence that neurological degeneration is beginning.
The researcher's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
A. Assumes proving many falls have another cause shows falls never indicate neurological decline.
B. Ignores that stiff joints and early neurological decline could coexist in some patients.
C. Takes for granted that “three or more falls” captures every clinically meaningful fall pattern.
D. Presumes the 62 percent figure is inherently large enough to overturn the diagnostic link.
E. Overlooks that participants may have been selected precisely because of musculoskeletal problems.
Conclusion: Clinicians should no longer treat a history of frequent falls as evidence that neurological degeneration is starting.
Key Premise: In a study of adults over 75, sixty-two percent of those who had three or more falls in the past year fell because of joint stiffness and muscle loss, not neurological decline.
Unstated Assumption: If many cases of a symptom turn out to have an alternative cause, the symptom can no longer serve as evidence for the original condition in any case.
Logical Flaw: The argument over-generalizes from “many” to “never.” Showing that an alternative cause is common does not prove the original cause is never present.
(A) Correct. The conclusion assumes that just because we observe many instances of falls as the result of another cause, makes the symptom (falls) irrelevant or even useless as evidence of the neurological condition. This is the flaw.
(B) Incorrect. Patients might have both joint problems and early neurological decline, which even if true, does not point out the logical flaw going from many to never, and thus is irrelevant to our argument.
(C) Incorrect. The reasoning error persists regardless of the threshold, so this misses the point.
(D) Incorrect. Sample size is an unrelated issue, and thus the core logical leap would be unsound even with a larger percentage.
(E) Incorrect. Sampling bias would weaken the study's generalizability, yet the leap from many to never would still be flawed even with a perfect sample.
Therefore, (A) is the only option that directly targets the argument’s central vulnerability.
Answer: A
