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.
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2107:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
01 Nov 2020, 02:31
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
85%
(hard)
Question Stats:
45% (01:54) correct
55%
(02:07)
wrong
based on 352
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Arguing for the integration of scent in design, Lance Hosey cites study findings that aromatic oils help dispel patients’ anxiety, the aroma of lavender may alleviate post-operative pain, and herbal scents such as rosemary may boost cognitive activity in Alzheimer’s patients. Therefore, the therapeutic value of nature’s aromatics bolsters the argument for the integration of herbs and flowers into urban planning.
The conclusion reached in this argument is
(A) logical because it is based on research studies that show the benefits of plants.
(B) logical because it documents validated, credible cause-and-effect relationships.
(C) faulty because the author essentially uses the information in the claim to re- state the claim.
(D) faulty because it presents an illogical either-or choice between institutional and urban settings.
(E) faulty because it leaps to a conclusion not substantiated by the studies that pre- cede
The conclusion reached in this argument is
(A) logical because it is based on research studies that show the benefits of plants.
(B) logical because it documents validated, credible cause-and-effect relationships.
(C) faulty because the author essentially uses the information in the claim to re- state the claim.
(D) faulty because it presents an illogical either-or choice between institutional and urban settings.
(E) faulty because it leaps to a conclusion not substantiated by the studies that pre- cede
01 Nov 2020, 05:48
Kudos
Bookmarks
Sajjad1994
yashikaaggarwal
Senior Moderator - Masters Forum
Joined: 19 Jan 2020
Last visit: 10 Aug 2026
Posts: 3,095
Given Kudos: 1,510
Location: India
Schools: Cranfield (A) Warwick MiM "23 (M)
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Internet and New Media)
01 Nov 2020, 08:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
The argument is based on a study by Lance Hosey, whose findings claim that aromatic oils help dispel patients’ anxiety, the aroma of lavender may alleviate post-operative pain, and herbal scents such as rosemary may boost cognitive activity in Alzheimer’s patients.
Therefore, the therapeutic value of nature’s aromatics bolsters the argument for the integration of herbs and flowers into urban planning.
However the study don't describe anything beyond the stated information, so concluding that all natural herbs and flowers is therapeutic is somewhere flawed. We can eliminate A and B.
In C, The conclusion don't re-state the words introduced in argument premise. If it had been, the conclusion would had stated about the said aromatic oil and scents, not generalizing all.
There is no choice given in the argument to choose in between any institutional or urban setting, nor argument background is drawn scaling such comparison. D Out
E is the answer because the conclusion don't backup its statement with any preceding premise or statement.
Therefore, the therapeutic value of nature’s aromatics bolsters the argument for the integration of herbs and flowers into urban planning.
However the study don't describe anything beyond the stated information, so concluding that all natural herbs and flowers is therapeutic is somewhere flawed. We can eliminate A and B.
In C, The conclusion don't re-state the words introduced in argument premise. If it had been, the conclusion would had stated about the said aromatic oil and scents, not generalizing all.
There is no choice given in the argument to choose in between any institutional or urban setting, nor argument background is drawn scaling such comparison. D Out
E is the answer because the conclusion don't backup its statement with any preceding premise or statement.
