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 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.
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.
Updated on: 07 Mar 2026, 09:10
Originally posted by MartyMurray on 02 May 2025, 13:20.
Last edited by MartyMurray on 07 Mar 2026, 09:10, edited 1 time in total.
Last edited by MartyMurray on 07 Mar 2026, 09:10, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
60% (01:38) correct
40%
(01:49)
wrong
based on 168
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Supervisor: For the company’s employees to achieve maximum productivity, they must not be distracted by the internet. Accordingly, if an employee is failing to meet the company’s productivity benchmarks, it is clear that we must restrict that employee’s internet access.
The supervisor’s argument is flawed because it
(A) takes for granted that employees who meet the company’s productivity benchmarks are not distracted by the internet
(B) uses as evidence an idea that makes sense only if the conclusion it supports is presupposed to be true
(C) uses as evidence a sample that may not be representative of the company’s employees in general
(D) presumes that an outcome’s not occurring is evidence sufficient for determining that a particular condition required for that outcome has not been met
(E) overlooks the possibility that the solution offered may not be sufficient for causing an employee to meet the productivity benchmarks
Source: Marty Murray Coaching
The supervisor’s argument is flawed because it
(A) takes for granted that employees who meet the company’s productivity benchmarks are not distracted by the internet
(B) uses as evidence an idea that makes sense only if the conclusion it supports is presupposed to be true
(C) uses as evidence a sample that may not be representative of the company’s employees in general
(D) presumes that an outcome’s not occurring is evidence sufficient for determining that a particular condition required for that outcome has not been met
(E) overlooks the possibility that the solution offered may not be sufficient for causing an employee to meet the productivity benchmarks
Source: Marty Murray Coaching
02 May 2025, 14:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
Supervisor: For the company’s employees to achieve maximum productivity, they must not be distracted by the internet. Accordingly, if an employee is failing to meet the company’s productivity benchmarks, it is clear that we must restrict that employee’s internet access.
The supervisor's conclusion is the following:
if an employee is failing to meet the company’s productivity benchmarks, it is clear that we must restrict that employee’s internet access
The support for the conclusion is the following:
For the company’s employees to achieve maximum productivity, they must not be distracted by the internet.
So, the supervisor's reasoning is basically that, since not being distracted by the internet is necessary for maximum productivity, if an employee is not sufficiently productive, it is necessary to restrict that employee's internet access.
One aspect of the argument that we might notice is that the reasoning jumps from evidence about not being distracted by the internet being necessary for productivity to a conclusion that is basically that, in any case of insufficient productivity, the employee's internet access "must" be restricted.
That jump doesn't really make sense. After all, the fact that an employee is not meeting productivity standards doesn't necessarily mean that that employee is distracted by the internet.
The supervisor’s argument is flawed because it
This is a Logical Flaw question, and the correct answer will accurately describe a way in which the argument is flawed.
(A) takes for granted that employees who meet the company’s productivity benchmarks are not distracted by the internet
This choice is incorrect because the argument doesn't do what it describes.
After all, the argument is about only what must be done if an employee is not meeting the productivity benchmarks. It does not present any conclusion about employees who are meeting the benchmarks.
Eliminate.
(B) uses as evidence an idea that makes sense only if the conclusion it supports is presupposed to be true
This choice is incorrect because the argument doesn't do what it describes.
After all, the premise "For the company’s employees to achieve maximum productivity, they must not be distracted by the internet," makes sense on its own.
So, the idea used as evidence can make sense regardless of whether it's true that "if an employee is failing to meet the company’s productivity benchmarks, it is clear that we must restrict that employee’s internet access."
Thus, it's not correct to say that the evidence "makes sense only if the conclusion it supports is presupposed to be true."
Eliminate.
(C) uses as evidence a sample that may not be representative of the company’s employees in general
This choice is clearly incorrect because the evidence used to support the conclusion is not "a sample." Rather, it's the fact that, "For the company’s employees to achieve maximum productivity, they must not be distracted by the internet."
So, while the argument does involve a subset of employees, those who do not meet the productivity benchmarks, it does not use a sample of employees as evidence.
Eliminate.
(D) presumes that an outcome’s not occurring is evidence sufficient for determining that a particular condition required for that outcome has not been met
This choice is a little hard to understand, but considering it carefully, we can see that it means the following:
It presumes that an outcome's not occurring, i.e., an employee "failing to meet the ... benchmarks," is evidence sufficient for determining that a condition required for that outcome, i.e., "not ... distracted by the internet," has not been met.
Simply put, in the context of the argument, this choice means that the argument assumes that the fact that an employee is not meeting the benchmarks means that the employee is distracted by the internet.
We can see that argument does indeed involve that assumption. After all, the only reason why it would be the case that an insufficiently productive employee's internet access "must" be restricted would be that what's causing the employee not to meet the benchmarks is distraction by the internet.
Furthermore, we can see that the fact that the argument assumes that is a flaw in the argument.
After all, the fact that an employee isn't meeting the benchmarks doesn't necessarily mean that the employees is distracted by the internet. After all, there are many possible reasons other than distraction by the internet for an employee's not meeting the benchmarks.
So, this choice describes a flaw in the argument.
Keep.
(E) overlooks the possibility that the solution offered may not be sufficient for causing an employee to meet the productivity benchmarks
This choice is tricky to eliminate because the argument does involve offering a solution: restricting an employee's internet access.
At the same time, we can eliminate this choice by noticing that the conclusion is not that restricting an employee's internet access is "sufficient" for causing an employee to meet the benchmarks. Rather, it's that we "must" restrict that employee’s internet access.
In other words, the point of the argument is that restricting such an employee's internet access is NECESSARY, not that it's SUFFICIENT for causing that employee to meet the benchmarks.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: D
For tips on eliminating tricky trap choices in Critical Reasoning, see this post: GMAT Critical Reasoning - Trap Choices Versus Correct Answers
The supervisor's conclusion is the following:
if an employee is failing to meet the company’s productivity benchmarks, it is clear that we must restrict that employee’s internet access
The support for the conclusion is the following:
For the company’s employees to achieve maximum productivity, they must not be distracted by the internet.
So, the supervisor's reasoning is basically that, since not being distracted by the internet is necessary for maximum productivity, if an employee is not sufficiently productive, it is necessary to restrict that employee's internet access.
One aspect of the argument that we might notice is that the reasoning jumps from evidence about not being distracted by the internet being necessary for productivity to a conclusion that is basically that, in any case of insufficient productivity, the employee's internet access "must" be restricted.
That jump doesn't really make sense. After all, the fact that an employee is not meeting productivity standards doesn't necessarily mean that that employee is distracted by the internet.
The supervisor’s argument is flawed because it
This is a Logical Flaw question, and the correct answer will accurately describe a way in which the argument is flawed.
(A) takes for granted that employees who meet the company’s productivity benchmarks are not distracted by the internet
This choice is incorrect because the argument doesn't do what it describes.
After all, the argument is about only what must be done if an employee is not meeting the productivity benchmarks. It does not present any conclusion about employees who are meeting the benchmarks.
Eliminate.
(B) uses as evidence an idea that makes sense only if the conclusion it supports is presupposed to be true
This choice is incorrect because the argument doesn't do what it describes.
After all, the premise "For the company’s employees to achieve maximum productivity, they must not be distracted by the internet," makes sense on its own.
So, the idea used as evidence can make sense regardless of whether it's true that "if an employee is failing to meet the company’s productivity benchmarks, it is clear that we must restrict that employee’s internet access."
Thus, it's not correct to say that the evidence "makes sense only if the conclusion it supports is presupposed to be true."
Eliminate.
(C) uses as evidence a sample that may not be representative of the company’s employees in general
This choice is clearly incorrect because the evidence used to support the conclusion is not "a sample." Rather, it's the fact that, "For the company’s employees to achieve maximum productivity, they must not be distracted by the internet."
So, while the argument does involve a subset of employees, those who do not meet the productivity benchmarks, it does not use a sample of employees as evidence.
Eliminate.
(D) presumes that an outcome’s not occurring is evidence sufficient for determining that a particular condition required for that outcome has not been met
This choice is a little hard to understand, but considering it carefully, we can see that it means the following:
It presumes that an outcome's not occurring, i.e., an employee "failing to meet the ... benchmarks," is evidence sufficient for determining that a condition required for that outcome, i.e., "not ... distracted by the internet," has not been met.
Simply put, in the context of the argument, this choice means that the argument assumes that the fact that an employee is not meeting the benchmarks means that the employee is distracted by the internet.
We can see that argument does indeed involve that assumption. After all, the only reason why it would be the case that an insufficiently productive employee's internet access "must" be restricted would be that what's causing the employee not to meet the benchmarks is distraction by the internet.
Furthermore, we can see that the fact that the argument assumes that is a flaw in the argument.
After all, the fact that an employee isn't meeting the benchmarks doesn't necessarily mean that the employees is distracted by the internet. After all, there are many possible reasons other than distraction by the internet for an employee's not meeting the benchmarks.
So, this choice describes a flaw in the argument.
Keep.
(E) overlooks the possibility that the solution offered may not be sufficient for causing an employee to meet the productivity benchmarks
This choice is tricky to eliminate because the argument does involve offering a solution: restricting an employee's internet access.
At the same time, we can eliminate this choice by noticing that the conclusion is not that restricting an employee's internet access is "sufficient" for causing an employee to meet the benchmarks. Rather, it's that we "must" restrict that employee’s internet access.
In other words, the point of the argument is that restricting such an employee's internet access is NECESSARY, not that it's SUFFICIENT for causing that employee to meet the benchmarks.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: D
For tips on eliminating tricky trap choices in Critical Reasoning, see this post: GMAT Critical Reasoning - Trap Choices Versus Correct Answers
Moderators:
