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.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
04 Jul 2018, 07:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
36% (02:26) correct
64%
(02:22)
wrong
based on 655
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
In a psychological experiment conducted at Southbay University, groups of men with various levels of education read stories in which people caused harm, some of them doing so intentionally, and some accidentally. When asked about appropriate penalization for those who had caused harm, the less educated men, unlike the educated ones, assigned punishments that did not vary according to whether the harm was done intentionally or accidentally. Uneducated men, then, do not regard people's intentions as relevant to penalization.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?
(A) In these stories, the severity of the harm produces was clearly stated.
(B) In interpreting these stories the listeners had to draw on a relatively feminine sense of human psychology in order to tell whether harm was produced intentionally or accidentally.
(C) Relatively uneducated men are as likely to produce harm unintentionally as are more educated men.
(D) The more educated men assigned penalization in a way that closely resembled the way women had assign penalization in a similar experiment.
(E) The less educated men assigned penalization that varied according to the severity of the harm done by the agents in the stories.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?
(A) In these stories, the severity of the harm produces was clearly stated.
(B) In interpreting these stories the listeners had to draw on a relatively feminine sense of human psychology in order to tell whether harm was produced intentionally or accidentally.
(C) Relatively uneducated men are as likely to produce harm unintentionally as are more educated men.
(D) The more educated men assigned penalization in a way that closely resembled the way women had assign penalization in a similar experiment.
(E) The less educated men assigned penalization that varied according to the severity of the harm done by the agents in the stories.
15 Apr 2019, 09:17
Kudos
Bookmarks
itisSheldon
Groups of men with various levels of education read stories in which people caused harm, some of them doing so intentionally, and some accidentally.
The less educated men, unlike the educated ones, assigned punishments that did not vary according to whether the harm was done intentionally or accidentally.
Conclusion: Uneducated men, then, do not regard people's intentions as relevant to penalization.
Since less educated men assigned punishments that did not vary according to whether harm was done intentionally or not, the conclusion says that uneducated men do not regard people's intentions as relevant to penalisation.
We need to weaken the conclusion above.
(A) In these stories, the severity of the harm produces was clearly stated.
Irrelevant. We need the relation between intention and penalisation.
(B) In interpreting these stories the listeners had to draw on a relatively feminine sense of human psychology in order to tell whether harm was produced intentionally or accidentally.
The participants had to read/listen to stories and interpret whether harm was produced intentionally or accidentally. So they were not given this information. They had to interpret it. Now, what if people with lower education found it hard to interpret whether harm was intentional or not? Then they would not base their penalisation on this factor. So this weakens our conclusion. It says that the observed result (less educated people ignored intentions) may not be because "uneducated men do not regard people's intentions as relevant to penalisation. " Instead, it may be because "uneducated men are unable to interpret whether harm was intentional or accidental".
This is correct.
(C) Relatively uneducated men are as likely to produce harm unintentionally as are more educated men.
Irrelevant. Level of education among perpetrators of the crime is not discussed.
(D) The more educated men assigned penalization in a way that closely resembled the way women had assign penalization in a similar experiment.
Irrelevant. No men vs women comparison.
(E) The less educated men assigned penalization that varied according to the severity of the harm done by the agents in the stories.
Irrelevant. It doesn't matter on what basis the less educated men assigned penalisation. Our conclusion is that they do not assign penalisation on the basis of intention. This option gives us one other factor on which they assign penalisation. So it doesn't weaken our conclusion. This option is nonconflicting with our conclusion.
Answer (B)
General Discussion
04 Jul 2018, 09:16
Kudos
Bookmarks
itisSheldon
Our objective here is to challenge the highlighted part of the stimulus....
Thus if the less educated varied punishments according to severity of the harm, it challenges/weakens the author's conclusion that they do not regard the intention of the people's intentions...
Hence answer must be (E)
