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 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 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
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.
25 Feb 2026, 20:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
66% (02:18) correct
34%
(02:14)
wrong
based on 181
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The Peregrine Foundation is a private, non-profit leukemia research institute. In the last ten years, the foundation has received an increased amount of donations, and the cost of conducting research has decreased. Yet, the quality of research produced by the foundation has fallen. Meanwhile, the quality of research conducted by most other leukemia-research organizations has risen. Clearly, over the past ten years, The Peregrine Foundation must have become a self-serving and wasteful organization.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion reached in the passage?
A. Many other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research provide financial relief to leukemia patients, in addition to conducting research.
B. Ten years ago, the quality of research produced by The Peregrine Foundation was better than that of other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research.
C. The average salaries of scientists and medical professionals employed by The Peregrine Foundation are slightly higher than those of doctors and scientists employed by other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research.
D. Over the past ten years, the percentage of the donations received by The Peregrine Foundation spent on research has risen, while the percentage spent on the management of the foundation has fallen.
E. Over the past ten years, the increase in the absolute amount of donations received by The Peregrine Foundation has averaged approximately five percent more than the local rate of inflation.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion reached in the passage?
A. Many other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research provide financial relief to leukemia patients, in addition to conducting research.
B. Ten years ago, the quality of research produced by The Peregrine Foundation was better than that of other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research.
C. The average salaries of scientists and medical professionals employed by The Peregrine Foundation are slightly higher than those of doctors and scientists employed by other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research.
D. Over the past ten years, the percentage of the donations received by The Peregrine Foundation spent on research has risen, while the percentage spent on the management of the foundation has fallen.
E. Over the past ten years, the increase in the absolute amount of donations received by The Peregrine Foundation has averaged approximately five percent more than the local rate of inflation.
26 Feb 2026, 00:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
Correct Answer: D
A. Many other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research provide financial relief to leukemia patients, in addition to conducting research.
Incorrect. What other organizations do with their funds doesn't tell us anything about whether the Peregrine Foundation is self-serving and wasteful with its own funds.
B. Ten years ago, the quality of research produced by The Peregrine Foundation was better than that of other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research.
Incorrect. This just gives us historical context. It doesn't explain why the quality dropped over the last ten years, nor does it refute the claim that the organization has become wasteful recently.
C. The average salaries of scientists and medical professionals employed by The Peregrine Foundation are slightly higher than those of doctors and scientists employed by other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research.
Incorrect. Paying scientists slightly more doesn't automatically mean the organization is "wasteful" or "self-serving" (especially since scientists are the ones doing the research). Even if it did, it certainly doesn't weaken the conclusion; if anything, someone might try to use this to slightly strengthen the argument.
D. Over the past ten years, the percentage of the donations received by The Peregrine Foundation spent on research has risen, while the percentage spent on the management of the foundation has fallen.
Correct. This option directly attacks the conclusion. If an organization is dedicating a higher percentage of its money to its actual mission (research) and a lower percentage to its own management/overhead, it is the exact opposite of "self-serving and wasteful." This severely weakens the author's specific conclusion, even if the mystery of the falling research quality remains unsolved.
E. Over the past ten years, the increase in the absolute amount of donations received by The Peregrine Foundation has averaged approximately five percent more than the local rate of inflation.
Incorrect. This just confirms and quantifies the premise that they have more money now. It does not address whether they are wasting that money.
A. Many other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research provide financial relief to leukemia patients, in addition to conducting research.
Incorrect. What other organizations do with their funds doesn't tell us anything about whether the Peregrine Foundation is self-serving and wasteful with its own funds.
B. Ten years ago, the quality of research produced by The Peregrine Foundation was better than that of other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research.
Incorrect. This just gives us historical context. It doesn't explain why the quality dropped over the last ten years, nor does it refute the claim that the organization has become wasteful recently.
C. The average salaries of scientists and medical professionals employed by The Peregrine Foundation are slightly higher than those of doctors and scientists employed by other private, non-profit organizations involved in leukemia research.
Incorrect. Paying scientists slightly more doesn't automatically mean the organization is "wasteful" or "self-serving" (especially since scientists are the ones doing the research). Even if it did, it certainly doesn't weaken the conclusion; if anything, someone might try to use this to slightly strengthen the argument.
D. Over the past ten years, the percentage of the donations received by The Peregrine Foundation spent on research has risen, while the percentage spent on the management of the foundation has fallen.
Correct. This option directly attacks the conclusion. If an organization is dedicating a higher percentage of its money to its actual mission (research) and a lower percentage to its own management/overhead, it is the exact opposite of "self-serving and wasteful." This severely weakens the author's specific conclusion, even if the mystery of the falling research quality remains unsolved.
E. Over the past ten years, the increase in the absolute amount of donations received by The Peregrine Foundation has averaged approximately five percent more than the local rate of inflation.
Incorrect. This just confirms and quantifies the premise that they have more money now. It does not address whether they are wasting that money.
26 Feb 2026, 00:53
Kudos
Bookmarks
PE is private and NP research institute.
in last ten years, received increased amount of donation nad their cost of research gone down but same time research quality has fallen as well.
quality at other orga has risen.
conclusion- in past ten years, PE has become self serving and wasteful org.
argument reasoning is about receiving more donation and falling in research quality. but conclusion is about them being self serving and wasteful.
so just because their quality has fallen and cost has gone down they are assuming they are using money for themselves and catering to them rather than public.
A this has no impact at all.
B then this somewhat strengthen it.
C this is out of scope.
D if they are spending more on research then we cant say they are self serving. passage says they are falling in quality of research, may be they are lacking something despite spending more money. this attacks the conclusion directly.
E its out of context.
in last ten years, received increased amount of donation nad their cost of research gone down but same time research quality has fallen as well.
quality at other orga has risen.
conclusion- in past ten years, PE has become self serving and wasteful org.
argument reasoning is about receiving more donation and falling in research quality. but conclusion is about them being self serving and wasteful.
so just because their quality has fallen and cost has gone down they are assuming they are using money for themselves and catering to them rather than public.
A this has no impact at all.
B then this somewhat strengthen it.
C this is out of scope.
D if they are spending more on research then we cant say they are self serving. passage says they are falling in quality of research, may be they are lacking something despite spending more money. this attacks the conclusion directly.
E its out of context.
ExpertsGlobal5
