When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is spent at

Question

When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is spent at the factory for safety precautions and machinery maintenance than when demand is low. Thus the average number of on-the-job accidents per employee each month should be lower during periods when demand is high than when demand is low and less money is available for safety precautions and machinery maintenance.

Which of the following, if true about a factory when demand for its products is high, casts the most serious doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

Which of the following, if true about a factory when demand for its products is high, casts the most serious doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Its employees ask for higher wages than they do at other times.
(B) Its management hires new workers but lacks the time to train them properly.
(C) Its employees are less likely to lose their jobs than they are at other times.
(D) Its management sponsors a monthly safety award for each division in the factory.
(E) Its old machinery is replaced with modern, automated models.

MarkSullivan · Accepted Answer

Good problem. Let's take a look at it step-by-step: Identify the Question Type. We want to "cast ... doubt on the conclusion drawn," so this is definitely a Weaken the Conclusion question. Deconstruct the Argument. Since it's Weaken , be on the lookout for unstated Assumptions and think about how we could use those to poke holes in the argument. Here's the basic structure: Conclusion: High demand should lead to a decrease in on-the-job accidents. Premises: High demand means more money for safety and machine maintenance. Ok, so what's the Assumption here? We're assuming that "more money spent on safety" = "fewer accidents". How can we pick this apart? Could other factors have an impact on the number of accidents? Absolutely!! We won't be able to predict what "other factors" might pop up in the correct answer, but at least we have a pretty good idea of what to look for. Restate the Goal. We're trying to Weaken the Conclusion , which for this problem means we want to identify another factor that could actually lead to more accidents even during times of higher demand . Notice how we've basically reframed the question so that it applies to the specifics of this problem. This is something I always try to do on CR before looking at the answer choices. Work through the Answers, moving from Wrong to Right. Let's take a look: (A) Its employees ask for higher wages than they do at other times. This has no impact on safety. Eliminate. (B) Its management hires new workers but lacks the time to train them properly. This could definitely be bad for safety! If we have high demand and spend more on safety, but then hire new workers and don't properly train them, this could provide another factor that leads to more accidents. Leave it in, try to eliminate other choices. (C) Its employees are less likely to lose their jobs than they are at other times. This has no impact on safety. Eliminate. (D) Its management sponsors a monthly safety award for each division in the factory. This is probably relevant, but makes the factory more safe. It actually Strengthens . Eliminate. (E) Its old machinery is replaced with modern, automated models. Same problem as (D). If it is relavent at all, it Strengthens . Eliminate. So indeed, we're left with (B)! Major Takeaways: (1) Stick to your process. (2) Look for Assumptions on Strengthen/Weaken questions. (3) Beware "opposite" trap answers (relavent, but strengthens when it should weaken, or vice versa). (4) State the goal in simple terms that are specific to the question before looking at the answers. (5) Stick to your process. :wink:

Cheers, Mark

GODSPEED · Answer

Looking for a weakner for the following conclusion: 
 Conclusion: the average number of on-the-job accidents per employee each month should be lower during periods when demand is high than when demand is low and less money is available for safety precautions and machinery maintenance.

A: Irrelevant 
 B: Right Contender for CORRECT Choice  
C: Irrelevant 
D: If management sponsors safety, then it should support and not weaken 
E: Again, irrelevant and supports the conclusion

Cheers
GODSPEED

ratinarace · Answer

When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is spent at the factory for safety precautions and machinery maintenance than when demand is low. Thus the average number of on-the-job accidents per employee each month should be lower during periods when demand is high than when demand is low and less money is available for safety precautions and machinery maintenance.

Which of the following, if true about a factory when demand for its products is high, casts the most serious doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

Which of the following, if true about a factory when demand for its products is high, casts the most serious doubt on the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Its employees ask for higher wages than they do at other times.
(B) Its management hires new workers but lacks the time to train them properly.
(C) Its employees are less likely to lose their jobs than they are at other times.
(D) Its management sponsors a monthly safety award for each division in the factory.
(E) Its old machinery is replaced with modern, automated models.

Undoubtedly the official answer here is B...I saw A and B as contenders for this question...I assume, had option B not been there A probably could be an answer......High Demand = More Money Spent on safety and machinery = less accident ......I welcome a debate on this

IanStewart · Answer

I'm curious why you think A would be a reasonable answer here? Is it because you think that if employees get higher wages, that will reduce the amount of money available for safety? If you're looking at the question that way, you're making a common CR mistake: you're trying to disprove one of the premises of the argument. The argument tells us that, when demand is high, more money is spent on safety. That is a premise: it is an absolute fact, and it cannot be wrong. Even if answer A is true, and companies pay their employees more when demand is high, it still absolutely must be true that companies also spend more on safety. So A cannot be the answer here.

We need an answer which suggests a reason there might be more accidents when demand is high  even though more money is spent on safety . Only B is a good answer: B tells us that when demand is high, not only is more money spent on safety, but something else happens as well: untrained workers are hired. And if the population of workers changes, and particularly if the new workers are not trained, that could increase the accident rate.

aditya111 · Answer

Can anyone explain why E is considered wrong? 
Doesn't it weaken the conclusion that states ' low and less money is available for safety precautions and  machinery maintenance ."

KUDOS   is a great way to encourage the complete community.

Vercules · Answer

Hi Aditya,

The conclusion or the argument is that   high demand should lead to a decrease in on-the-job accidents   and we have to weaken this. The author tries to support the conclusion by stating the fact that higher amount of money is spent on safety and maintenance when demand is high.

(E) says that old machinery is replaced by new ones and that too automated ones. If the machines are new and automated then there will be no need or minimal need to operate manually. It will reduce the chances of injury, even in high demand situations. In fact (E) will strengthen the conclusion and support that there will be less on-the-job accidents.

Hope that helps,

Vercules

him1985 · Answer

Conclusion can be weakend if we prove that more accidents occur when products are in high demand than in low demand period.

B. Its management hires new workers but lacks the time to train them properly. - With new inexperienced workers \ accidents are sure to occur - Weekens the arguement -

adkikani · Answer

nightblade354   VeritasPrepKarishma   generis   GMATNinja

Can you validate my PoE?

↑ Demand : ↑↑$ spent on safety precautions and maintenance of machinery than when demand is ↓

Conclusion: ↓ no of accidents when demand is ↑

We need to weaken above conclusion.

We can weaken by giving ALTERNATE cause (replacing machinery) for the same effect (ie decrease of no of accidents)
Here, we are giving alternate cause for the OPPOSITE effect and hence this answer option is incorrect.

nightblade354 · Answer

You are indeed correct. E is the opposite of what we want. E does not work for this question because it strengthens the conclusion. We want to weaken the conclusion to the best of our abilities, and B does a great job of doing this

anothermillenial · Answer

The conclusion drawn above is that accidents decrease when demand is high. This author of this statement argues that this is truth since when demand is high, more money is being pumped into the factory to address safety issues. This assumption here is that increased money leads to increased safety. However, that is not always the case. Though this is not an assumption questions, some plausible objections to the author’s point could be that machine maintenance requires more workers to put their lives at risk, or that higher demand leads to overwork (and overwork leads to more accidents), or that money spent leads to more employees in the factory and overcrowding leads to worse working conditions. I could go on….but you get it.

(A) Its employees ask for higher wages than they do at other times. This doesn’t affect our conclusion about accident frequency. (B) Its management hires new workers but lacks the time to train them properly. Hm, this could explain why accidents might actually INCREASE. Also, quite similar to our anticipated answer. (C) Its employees are less likely to lose their jobs than they are at other times. Again, doesn’t affect our conclusion about accident frequency. (D) Its management sponsors a monthly safety award for each division in the factory. I, too, love awards but this answer choice is very out of scope. (E) Its old machinery is replaced with modern, automated models. Hm, if anything, this would support our author. If we’re increasing automation, then people are less likely to be harmed.

mba757 · Answer

Stimulus: P; C Conclusion: average number of on-the-job accidents per employee each month should be lower during periods when demand is high
A. The wages aren’t a concern
a. We’re told more money spent on safety precautions and maintenance
b. Story trap, if anything
B. Okay if demand is high and the management is hiring new workers to satisfy that demand (presumably with some common sense assumptions) but lacks the time to preoperly train them…
a. Workers could be causing problems throughout the process, leading to potentially less safe situations and therefore on-the-job accidents
C. Story trap; it’s about safety and number of accidents, given the higher demand (and thus more money spent on some safety precautions)
a. People losing their jobs, even because of the accidents or anything of that nature is out of scope
D. This is an effect of the current effect
a. But if anything, this seems like an incentive to be safe (and presumably, have less accidents); could strengthen, if anything
E. If anything, this would support the conclusion
a. More money spent; money that could’ve been spent on some modern, automated models. Automated, so maybe less chances for human error, which cause accidents?

psls · Answer

Hi Experts,

GMATNinja   MarkSullivan   EducationAisle   AjiteshArun   VeritasKarishma

According to this thought,

In the other hand,  Strengthen  is on the unstated  Assumptions or gaps  that, when filled, makes conclusion stronger.

Why the questions type "Assumption" or "Depend on" are not approached like Strengthen Questions? 
Since, in Assumption Questions we need to fill gap or bridge to make conclusion stronger

Thanks in advance.
-tor

mSKR · Answer

Strengthen: Support the conclusion but not a necessary condition
Assumptions: Support the conclusion and is a must condition ( necessary condition)

Example for this particular question:
Strengthen: 
1. Increased maintenance frequency to avoid machine incidents 
2. Advance prediction risk systems--alert employees if in case any danger 
etc.
Above conditions support the argument that increase money on safety and maintenance reduced number of accidents per employee

Assumptions: 
employees are working at machines like before ( necessary condition--what if employees changed how they operate machines that reduced the # accidents/employee)
Employees were not replaced with high trained professionals ( what if experts use the same machines then obviously accidents are expected to reduce ). On negation , you can visualize that money spent on safety and maintenance seems to be of no effect. 
machines are same( machines are not changed to automated machines) .
etc

I hope you can understand difference between assumption vs strengthen. Both support the argument .But with assumptions, your argument would stay valid .

KarishmaB · Answer

Assumption questions are a special type of Strengthen questions. Assumption questions do strengthen the conclusion and in addition, they are necessary for the conclusion to hold. Check here: https://youtu.be/O0ROJfljRLU

egmat · Answer

Solution 
 Passage Analysis 
• When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is spent at the factory for safety precautions and machinery maintenance than when demand is low.
 o When demand for the product is high
 More money is spent on safety and maintenance
 o When demand of the product is low
 Less money is spent on safety and maintenance. 
• Thus, the average number of on-the-job accidents per employee each month should be lower during periods when demand is high than when demand is low and less money is available for safety precautions and machinery maintenance.
• The average number of accidents during work for each employee each month should be lower for periods of high demand than low demand.
  During periods of low demand, less money is available for safety precautions and machinery maintenance. 
 Conclusion:  The average number of on-the-job accidents per employee each month should be lower during periods when demand is high than when demand is low.

Question Stem Analysis 
Which of the following, if true about a factory when demand for its products is high, casts the most serious doubt on the conclusion drawn above?
 This is a weaken question. We are given a condition that the statement should be true when the demand for the factory’s products is high.
 
 Answer Choice Analysis

(A) Its employees ask for higher wages than they do at other times.
INCORRECT
 Employees asking for wages does not affect the safety precautions or maintenance in the factory. Hence this option cannot be the right answer.

(B) Its management hires new workers but lacks the time to train them properly.
 CORRECT 
 This is the correct answer because even with higher precautions in place and better maintenance, if the new employees are not properly trained, the chance of accidents at work will be higher.

(C) Its employees are less likely to lose their jobs than they are at other times.
 Whether employees lose jobs or not has no impact on the rate of accidents per employee per month. Hence, this is an incorrect answer.

(D) Its management sponsors a monthly safety award for each division in the factory.
 This option is irrelevant as it simply instituting an award during the high-demand period cannot impact the average number of accidents per employee per month.

(E) Its old machinery is replaced with modern, automated models.
 This can only strengthen the conclusion, not weaken it. Hence it is an incorrect answer.

Lilit23 · Answer

Good. I'm iterest in it. Can you write to me.

Fdambro294 · Answer

Fantastic post.

A decade old post that is STILL 100% relevant.

Posted from my mobile device

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is spent at

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

When demand for a factory's products is high, more money is spent at

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards