In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University, over the las

Question

In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University, over the last four years, an average of 61 percent admitted to cheating on assignments and examinations. The figure declined somewhat from 65 percent earlier in the decade, but the number students cheating in examinations as reported by the examination office has increased over the same period.

Which of the following best explains the discrepancy outlined above?

Which of the following best explains the discrepancy outlined above?

A. The examinations office has become more effective in identifying instances of cheating.

B. Those students who used to earlier cheat in assignments have now started cheating in examinations alone.

C. The number of students who cheat has increased but the percentage has decreased over the past 4 years.

D. Students have not provided correct and representative answers in the survey and thus impacted the validity of the results.

E. The sample of 14,000 students is not large enough to draw such inferences about the whole University.

vishnuns39620 · Accepted Answer

Suyash, Your explanation was very useful in clearing the question, which I admit was a little challenging to absorb. But If I may repackage your answer, I'd do so in the following way :- 1) On one hand we have Surveys, where students report their cheating habits --> This number has declined, so overall students are cheating less 2) On the other hand, more students have been caught cheating by officials --> This number has increased and we need to try explain how this is possible, given that students are cheating less overall. Now, from among the options as pointed out by Suyash, Option A says the officials are more vigilant/effective and this could explain the seemingly conflicting numbers. A final explanation using simple numbers! OLD Scenario : 100 students, 65 cheaters, lets assume 5 cheaters are caught --> 65% cheating, vigilance efficiency = 5/65 or 7.7 % NEW Scenario : 100 students, 61 cheaters , lets assume 6 cheaters are caught --> 61 % cheating, vigilance efficiency = 6/61 or 9.8 % Therefore, improved vigilance efficiency in the recent years CAN explain why cheaters are less, but more are being caught. Hope this helps a little! :-D

sa2222 · Answer

Dear ShahPranay14 and ronr34, aks456 Please find the explanations for options C and D.

In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University, over the last four years, an average of 61 percent admitted to cheating on assignments and examinations. The figure declined somewhat from 65 percent earlier in the decade, but the number students cheating in examinations as reported by the examination office has increased over the same period.
Which of the following best explains the discrepancy outlined above?

The examinations office has become more effective in identifying instances of cheating.
- This definitely explains why the reported numbers have increased.

Those students who used to earlier cheat in assignments have now started cheating in examinations alone.

The number of students who cheat has increased but the percentage has decreased over the past 4 years.
- Keep in mind, the stimulus clearly mentions "In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University", thus the number of students surveyed remains the same. If at all, C is just restating what is already stated in the stimulus. It does not provide any discrepancy. the discrepancy we are talking about is "When the percent decreased, why the numbers increased?

Students have not provided correct and representative answers in the survey and thus impacted the validity of the results.
Option D - does not provide a strong evidence because if the students did not provide correct survey this time, they may have done the same thing, the last time.

The sample of 14,000 students is not large enough to draw such inferences about the whole University.
- Referring to the stimulus again - "In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University", all 14,000 students are surveyed, thus this is incorrect to say.

If it helped you, Kudos Please, I need them too!!

suyash23n · Answer

I Believe the word "reported" in the sentence is what makes the difference.

There are 2 distinct info available from the passage:

1- Results of survey, whee students directly respond to the survey----> gives the result in terms of number of student who cheat in exams.
2- Exam officials reporting the numbers.

What is asked : Despite the % of students who admit to cheat declined. The number of students who were reported by exam official increased.

Option A gives you an explanation, why the numbers have increased-----> it's because the officials are more 
vigilant and are reporting more such cases of cheating.

Hope that helps!

ronr34 · Answer

I still don't get it.
If the students provided false reports, and they also did it in the past, that doesn't take away from the explanation.
As I see it, D settles the paradox.
Can anyone offer a different explanation?

sa2222 · Answer

I would like others to respond as well. But, for Option D - firstly, we don't even know which survey the stimulus is referring to. Is it referring to the survey which has 61 % as the result or the one with 65%. So, which of these surveys has the discrepancy of results? Occurred to me - when I re read it.

Thanks!

Thanks!

vishnuns39620 · Answer

I see that there's still a lot of confusion as to why "D" is an incorrect option. Lets look at the two solutions we agree upon :- Solution 1) The Vigilance/Officials are doing a better job of finding cheaters, hence higher # of cheaters brought to book, despite overall lower # of cheating students Solution 2) Students provided false reports...... Although it seems like both the above solutions are "correct", the 2nd solution above conflicts with the premise laid out in the question. The Premise uses the phrase "students admitted to..." which we must take to mean they were honest while reporting. If a GMAT option seems to be "going against the given premise", you can almost surely take that to be a trick option, trying to suck you into making a mistake! Vigilance is key here! :!:

Now that you have these two solutions, would you not take the first solution, simply because it does not go against the premise? Hope this helps! Sorry I didnt check this thread in a long time

, but I hope those who come along now will find it helpful. GMAT questions will not try to go against given premise, a very useful vigilance tool; Cheers. - Vishnu

EliLTG · Answer

This is the key, actually.

We are looking to resolve a paradox between the results of a study of the past four years and the results of a study a decade ago. Whether the studies were accurate or inaccurate is irrelevant--what matters is what's  changed  between the two surveys. Since answer choice D gives us no information indicating that students were more likely to lie on one survey than on another, Choice D gives us no ability to explain the paradox.

Hope this helps!

JarvisR · Answer

My 2 cents on this problem. BTW this question is not an official question..
Q Type: Paradox.
Correct answer support both side of argument.

P1: In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University, over the last four years, an average of  61 percent admitted to cheating on assignments and examinations . 
P2: The  figure declined somewhat from 65 percent earlier in the decade , 
P3: but   the number students cheating in examinations as reported by the examination office has increased   over the same period.

Which of the following best  explains the discrepancy outlined above ?

The examinations office has become more effective in identifying instances of cheating.
>> This answer has already been explained in above posts... So lets focus on rest.
Those students who used to earlier  cheat in assignments have now started cheating in examinations  alone.
 >>Doesn't matter.
 The number of students who cheat has increased but the percentage has decreased over the past 4 years.
>> In way its restating the paradox of premise which needs to be solved. So this doesn't help much. 
Students have not provided correct and representative answers in the survey and thus impacted the validity of the results.
 >> What if they lied earlier as well. In that case the whole argument is invalid and no there is no paradox. So we can avoid this answer.
 The sample of  14,000 students is not large enough to draw such inferences  about the whole University.
 >>Not relevant.

itzmyzone911 · Answer

C cannot be the answer as it is restating the premises.

A it is.

The percentage of students ADMITTING has decreased but the number as REPORTED by college has increased. The correct answer will bring out this difference between students  admitting  and college  reporting . A does it well by stating that college has become more effective in identifying instances of cheating hence no. of reporting will definitely go up despite percentage of students declining.

fecob · Answer

The argument states that 'over the last four years, an average of 61% admitted...' and that this figure 'declined somewhat from 65% earlier in the decade'

Answer choice C, states that 'the percentage has decreased over the past 4 years' which is somethig we cannot assure. Maybe, for the past four years the respective percentages were 60%-61%-61%-62%. In this case, the percentage has increased, not decreased, and is still under 65%.
ie:
Year %
2005 65%
2006 65%
2007 65%
2008 65%
2009 65%
2010 65%
2011 60%
2012 61%
2013 61%
2014 62%

This is why the correct answer is A rather than C

chetan2u · Answer

hi,
the main thing from the C is that..
"C. The number of students who cheat has increased but the percentage has decreased over the past 4 years"..

How is above possible.. It is possible if the number of students taking the exam has increased. this will lead to a lower percentage giving us a larger number..

say 100 students gave exam in previous decade... 65% means 65 were caught/admitted to cheating..
this year 200 students gave exam.. 61%, which is 122, were caught/admitted to cheating...
so number has increased from 65 to 122 but the % has decreased to 61% from 65%..

But what are we talking of in our conclusion.. we are talking of those caught and reported by examination office, which gets strengthened by A

LogicGuru1 · Answer

A for me also 
 This strongly resembles a explain the paradox question. The actual numbers used in the stimulus are meaningless except for the generalized truth that 10 years back more students used to cheat. Now less student are cheating. But University officer are reporting (catching ) more cheating students.
 
 Simplifying the argument leads to only a strong contender OPTION A
Examination officers have become more effective in catching cheaters. 
 
 This explain the paradox in both the premises (Premise 1 -less cheater) (Premise 2- more cheaters caught in the act)

Consider this analogy :- In Africa the number of lions is continuously decreasing at a rate of 6 % percent in the last 7 years. Yet African wild life officials claim more lions are getting medical care when injured. Explain the discrepancy why despite better medical care the population of lion is decreasing.

Answer would be:- Faster vehicle and effective tranquillisers have made it easier for the wild life official to capture injured lions and aid them medically.

Answer would be:- Faster vehicle and effective tranquillisers have made it easier for the wild life official to capture injured lions and aid them medically. 
 
The number of lions is decreasing because of  disease, poaching, human encroachment and injuries . Now the one who are inured are getting saved but what about the others lions who are dying of other reasons (hunting by poachers and hunters, poisoning by famers etc etc). The overall number of lions is decreasing but one subset (injured) is resisting against the overall decrease. However it does not mean that other reasons will have no effect on the overall cause.

Similarly , In this case honest student are resisting to bring the numbers of cheater down. But it does not mean that the one that are cheating, when caught will not take the overall reported cheating numbers high. And if officials have become better in catching cheaters than off course the number will go high.

hope its clear !

In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University, over the last four years, an average of 61 percent admitted to cheating on assignments and examinations. The figure declined somewhat from 65 percent earlier in the decade, but the number students cheating in examinations as reported by the examination office has increased over the same period.
Which of the following best explains the discrepancy outlined above?

The examinations office has become more effective in identifying instances of cheating.

Those students who used to earlier cheat in assignments have now started cheating in examinations alone.

The number of students who cheat has increased but the percentage has decreased over the past 4 years.

Students have not provided correct and representative answers in the survey and thus impacted the validity of the results.

The sample of 14,000 students is not large enough to draw such inferences about the whole University.

sayantanc2k · Answer

The first sentence states that all 14,000 students were surveyed. The survey was not conducted "over the last 4 years", but the percentage has decreased "over the last 4 years" - each year all 14,000 students were surveyed. There is a small assumption leap here, but it is less practical to assume that the survey was carried out over 4 years to cover 14,000 students - after all why would a University do that as that would not give it any useful data to compare with each other - than to assume that all 14,000 students were surveyed every year.

venky90 · Answer

A. The examinations office has become more effective in identifying instances of cheating.   This explains why the examinations office claims that the number of students cheating in examinations has increased.

B. Those students who used to earlier cheat in assignments have now started cheating in examinations alone.   This would have made the percentage of cheaters on assignment fall significantly. That is not the case here.

C. The number of students who cheat has increased but the percentage has decreased over the past 4 years.  4 year data is not sufficient to make this claim. Hence IRRELEVANT.

D. Students have not provided correct and representative answers in the survey and thus impacted the validity of the results.  There isn't sufficient grounds to derive this conclusion

E. The sample of 14,000 students is not large enough to draw such inferences about the whole University.  The survey includes all students as enumerated by the phrase "In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University".

mallya12 · Answer

GMATNinja   GMATNinja Two  VeritasKarishma

Say there are 1000 students
Before 65 % admitted to cheat --> 650 cheated= Examination + Assignment(say 200 +450 respectively)
Now 61% admitted to cheat---> 610 cheated= examination +assignment.

Conclusion tells students cheating in examination has increased. Say all now cheat in the examination alone (i.e 610 ). Doesn't this resolve the paradox ?? Why is option B wrong??

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.

In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University, over the las

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

In a survey of all 14,000 undergraduates in a University, over the las

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