Marketing chief: The aggressive sales campaign of Product J

Question

Marketing chief : The aggressive sales campaign of Product J has made it the most popular product in the sector. Every individual move we made in that campaign was wildly successful, and sales of the product continuously rose. If we mount a similar style sales campaign with Product S, we are likely to vault this into popularity in its own sector, with a similarly robust sales trajectory.

Consultant : The popularity of Product J preceded the sales campaign and was responsible for it.

The consultant uses which of the following techniques in responding to the marketing chief?

A) questioning the posited relationship of cause and effect 
B) citing evidence that contradicts the assumption of the argument 
C) pointing out that the same premises might support an opposing conclusion 
D) citing evidence that calls into question the strength of the premise 
E) strengthening the argument with further evidence

OA to follow

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear Guerrero25 I'm happy to help. :-)

This is a Magoosh question, and in fact, I was the author of this particular question. You can see a full discussion of it, with OA & OE, here: https://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-cr-di ... questions/ Mike :-)

Avinashs87 · Answer

Isn't d a better answer choice than a. It essentially is saying the same thing but it states the added point of the 'evidence' mentioned.

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear Avinashs87 , I'm happy to respond. :-)

In the question, part of the marketing chief's argument is the idea that (sales campaign) caused (popularity of Product J). In other words, in his mind, the cause was the sales campaign and the effect was the popularity of Product J. The consultant switches around the order of cause and effect, saying that the popularity of Product J was the cause and the effectiveness of the sale campaign was the effect. Thus, he questioned the posited relation of cause and effect. That's choice (A) , the OA. Choice (D) is a good distractor, but think about it. What exactly is the premise? A premise is something factual, something presented as indisputable. What the consultant says appears to be a premise, for example. Here's what's very tricky. If the marketing chief said what he said and no one responded, we would be in the position of having to accept his first sentence as a premise, as factual. BUT because the consultant called that very statement into question, we cannot consider it a premise. Calling a premise into question would be question factual information. For example, if person #1 said, last year our company sold over 10000 new vehicles, and then person #2 said, more than half of those sales were made the year before and, for inventory purposes, carried over to last year's balance sheets----that would be an example of calling a premise into question. It's basically saying: what you said about the facts is not correct, because those are not the facts. Does this distinction make sense? Mike

RK84 · Answer

Hi Mike,
I have a lot of respect for your explanations on the questions posted on this forum. Thanks for being here to help the aspirants out.
Regarding the solution of this question:
My reasoning for option D- the conclusion of the argument made by the mktg chief is: since J is successful, S will be successful. Now the first part about J might be a claim but in the context of the argument it is working as a premise. Is a premise always factual or some claims can also be taken as premise? Please help.

Besides, in option A, the consultant is not questioning, right? He is just stating a claim. Can it be taken as questioning ?

In the question, part of the marketing chief's argument is the idea that (sales campaign) caused (popularity of Product J). In other words, in his mind, the cause was the sales campaign and the effect was the popularity of Product J. The consultant switches around the order of cause and effect, saying that the popularity of Product J was the cause and the effectiveness of the sale campaign was the effect. Thus, he questioned the posited relation of cause and effect. That's choice (A) , the OA. Choice (D) is a good distractor, but think about it. What exactly is the premise? A premise is something factual, something presented as indisputable. What the consultant says appears to be a premise, for example. Here's what's very tricky. If the marketing chief said what he said and no one responded, we would be in the position of having to accept his first sentence as a premise, as factual. BUT because the consultant called that very statement into question, we cannot consider it a premise. Calling a premise into question would be question factual information. For example, if person #1 said, last year our company sold over 10000 new vehicles, and then person #2 said, more than half of those sales were made the year before and, for inventory purposes, carried over to last year's balance sheets----that would be an example of calling a premise into question. It's basically saying: what you said about the facts is not correct, because those are not the facts. Does this distinction make sense? Mike

MagooshExpert · Answer

Hi RK84 ! Carolyn from Magoosh here -- I can step in for Mike

First, we need to be clear about the parts of the argument. As you said, the conclusion is: Since J is successful, S will be successful But a conclusion is very different from a premise . A premise is a piece of information which supports the conclusion. Here, the premises are: Sales of J increased over the course of the marketing campaign. That's it. That's the fact that is used to support the conclusion. Now, a claim is not necessarily a fact, but something that is also used to support the conclusion. Here, the claim is: The aggressive sales campaign of Product J has made it the most popular product in the sector. Since this is not a piece of factual information, just an interpretation, it is a claim, not a premise (a premise must be true in the context of the argument). This is the claim that the Consultant is challenging. As for your second question, "stating a claim" can certainly be interpreted as "questioning an argument". For example, if you say "This ice cream is chocolate" and in response, I say "this ice cream is vanilla", then I am questioning your claim. With GMAT dialogue questions like these, we should always interpret the second "speaker" as responding to the first, and questioning the first argument. Hope that helps!

-Carolyn

aragonn · Answer

Official Explanation 
The marketing chief believes the aggressive sales campaign caused Product J's popularity, and wants to cause the same kind of popularity for Product S. The consultant points out the popularity of Product J came first and, in some sense, caused the sales campaign. Thus, the consultant is suggesting that what is cause and what is effect is different than what the marketing chief suggested. That's why (A) is the credited answer.

It's not clear that what the consultant says is a measured data (i.e. evidence) or just a perspective or opinion. Therefore, it's not clear whether we can call it evidence. Because this point is in doubt, we have to reject both choices (B) and (D).

The consultant does not agree with the marketing chief's premises, so she is not suggesting that these same premises lead to anything else. That's why choice (C) is incorrect.

The consultant definitely weakens the marketing chief's argument, so choice (E) cannot possibly be correct.

yashika001 · Answer

No, this option d still making me convinced to be avoidable .
Does questioning word does nt make it option to bee very extreme to be considered in answer choices?

yashika001 · Answer

No, this option d still making me convinced to be avoidable .
Does questioning word does nt make it option to bee very extreme to be considered in answer choices?

Marketing chief: The aggressive sales campaign of Product J

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

Marketing chief: The aggressive sales campaign of Product J

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