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 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.
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 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 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.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
02 May 2022, 08:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
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:
38% (01:47) correct
63%
(02:00)
wrong
based on 160
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The average age of chairpersons in a large sample of departments at Delhi University is 55. The average age of chairpersons in those same departments 20 years ago was approximately ten years younger. On the basis of such data, it can be concluded that chairpersons in general tend to be older now.
Which of the following casts the most doubt on the conclusion drawn above?
A. The dates when the chairpersons assumed their current positions have not been specified.
B. No information is given concerning the average number of years that chairpersons remain in office.
C. The information is based only on departments that have been operating for at least 20 years.
D. Only approximate information is given concerning the average age of the chairperson's 20 years ago.
E. Information concerning the exact number of departments in the sample has not been given.
Which of the following casts the most doubt on the conclusion drawn above?
A. The dates when the chairpersons assumed their current positions have not been specified.
B. No information is given concerning the average number of years that chairpersons remain in office.
C. The information is based only on departments that have been operating for at least 20 years.
D. Only approximate information is given concerning the average age of the chairperson's 20 years ago.
E. Information concerning the exact number of departments in the sample has not been given.
VicariousAdmit
Joined: 15 Apr 2022
Last visit: 19 Jun 2022
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 2
Location: Canada
Schools: Booth '25 CBS '25 Darden '25 Fuqua '25 Haas '25 HBS '25 Cornell '25 Kellogg '25 Ross '25 Sloan '25 Stanford '25 Tuck '25 Wharton '25 Yale '25
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
Schools: Booth '25 CBS '25 Darden '25 Fuqua '25 Haas '25 HBS '25 Cornell '25 Kellogg '25 Ross '25 Sloan '25 Stanford '25 Tuck '25 Wharton '25 Yale '25
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
Posts: 8
Kudos:
3
02 May 2022, 20:09
Kudos
Bookmarks
The average age of chairpersons in a large sample of departments at Delhi University is 55. The average age of chairpersons in those same departments 20 years ago was approximately ten years younger. On the basis of such data, it can be concluded that chairpersons in general tend to be older now.
Which of the following casts the most doubt on the conclusion drawn above?
Currently avg age = 55
Twenty years ago avg age = 45
Seems reasonable to say avg is older now. However, the conclusion asks us to say this of 'chairpersons in general' whereas we only have information on a selection of a particular sample of departments at a particular university.
A. The dates when the chairpersons assumed their current positions have not been specified.
-> The date they assumed their roles makes no difference on their ages. We are comparing two snap shots in time to each other (now and 20 years ago).
B. No information is given concerning the average number of years that chairpersons remain in office.
-> Same idea as above. The only relevant detail is the difference in average age in the segment we are comparing at two different times.
C. The information is based only on departments that have been operating for at least 20 years.
-> Bingo. It's possible that the newer departments have a younger age on average than the departments measured in this study. If there's lots of new departments where the chairperson average age is 30 for example, then the average chairperson of all departments could be younger than it used to be.
Alternatively it's worth noting we only have info on the departments in the sample, but are to make a conclusion about 'all chairpeople'. It's possible that the departments not included in the sample had on average a lot older population (70 average age or something). If this changed (the non sampled departments were mostly replaced with young blood) in the twenty years in between, it may be the case that the average age of all chairpeople decreased over that time period even though the sample wouldn't capture it.
The main issue is that we are drawing a conclusion about a broader group than the sample (which wasn't even confirmed as being a representative sample), based on the change in the sample group. There's all sorts of ways the sample could changes in ways different from the broader group.
D. Only approximate information is given concerning the average age of the chairperson's 20 years ago.
-> We're only looking for an approximate answer (older) so this doesn't really matter. If the chairpeople are on average 10 years older now, that's definitely enough info to say they're on average older.
E. Information concerning the exact number of departments in the sample has not been given.
-> Not relevant. If 'large sample' means 10 or if it means 50 it doesn't make much difference to the validity of the conclusion without having other info to judge it against.
Which of the following casts the most doubt on the conclusion drawn above?
Currently avg age = 55
Twenty years ago avg age = 45
Seems reasonable to say avg is older now. However, the conclusion asks us to say this of 'chairpersons in general' whereas we only have information on a selection of a particular sample of departments at a particular university.
A. The dates when the chairpersons assumed their current positions have not been specified.
-> The date they assumed their roles makes no difference on their ages. We are comparing two snap shots in time to each other (now and 20 years ago).
B. No information is given concerning the average number of years that chairpersons remain in office.
-> Same idea as above. The only relevant detail is the difference in average age in the segment we are comparing at two different times.
C. The information is based only on departments that have been operating for at least 20 years.
-> Bingo. It's possible that the newer departments have a younger age on average than the departments measured in this study. If there's lots of new departments where the chairperson average age is 30 for example, then the average chairperson of all departments could be younger than it used to be.
Alternatively it's worth noting we only have info on the departments in the sample, but are to make a conclusion about 'all chairpeople'. It's possible that the departments not included in the sample had on average a lot older population (70 average age or something). If this changed (the non sampled departments were mostly replaced with young blood) in the twenty years in between, it may be the case that the average age of all chairpeople decreased over that time period even though the sample wouldn't capture it.
The main issue is that we are drawing a conclusion about a broader group than the sample (which wasn't even confirmed as being a representative sample), based on the change in the sample group. There's all sorts of ways the sample could changes in ways different from the broader group.
D. Only approximate information is given concerning the average age of the chairperson's 20 years ago.
-> We're only looking for an approximate answer (older) so this doesn't really matter. If the chairpeople are on average 10 years older now, that's definitely enough info to say they're on average older.
E. Information concerning the exact number of departments in the sample has not been given.
-> Not relevant. If 'large sample' means 10 or if it means 50 it doesn't make much difference to the validity of the conclusion without having other info to judge it against.
09 Dec 2024, 12:54
Kudos
Bookmarks
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.
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.
