When drivers are deprived of sleep there are definite behavioral chang

Hey All,

Real confusion here, and it is a tough question! People have already written everything that I would write, so I'm just going to pick a side and explain it.

In B, the issue is that people are biased so can't make an unbiased decision. This is not what happens in any of the other answer choices. Particularly the original; the issue isn't that they are so tired they can't tell they're tired, it's simply that they can't tell their tired. Just as drunk people can't tell they're drunk, workers can't tell the noxious fumes are affecting them, and everything else.

Making C the answer, because the fumes haven't caused a negative effect yet, appears way too subtle for me. The idea that people are biased against something is far more of an outlier. I believe the answer is B. Who wants to argue?

-tommy

I must say, its a nice question. Got caught by B, and selected the ans. Later realised that C is much better
Here goes the reasoning.

Lets begin by breaking the argument into Free Body Diagram.

When drivers are deprived of sleep there are definite behavioral changes, such as slower responses to stimuli and a reduced ability to concentrate, but people’s self-awareness of these changes is poor. Most drivers think they can tell when they are about to fall asleep, but they cannot.

You may observe that, the group of people under consideration is aware of the problem i.e they are deprived of sleep. Now they are making a decision about something, which is incorrect.

Now lets analyse the options..

(A) People who have been drinking alcohol are not good judges of whether they are too drunk to drive.
>> Notice that people who are drinking alcohol are aware that it may affect driving, yet they are unable to make any decision. So, it matches similar reasoning.

(B) Elementary school students who dislike arithmetic are not good judges of whether multiplication tables should be included in the school’s curriculum.
>>Please see that students are aware that they are weak in arithmetic, yet they are unable to decide about multiplication tables. Again a similar reasoning.
(C) Industrial workers who have just been exposed to noxious fumes are not good judges of whether they should keep working.
>> Here comes the answer. You may observe that the group of people are not aware of working under noxious fumes ( I am making an assumption here that they are unaware of the fact, this is a catch ball of this reasoning, but looking at other options we can say that this is an external effect i.e noxious fumes, while all other involves internal such as drinking, math skills, blood donation and medical treatment) and we are talking of their judgement regarding working.

(D) People who have just donated blood and have become faint are not good judges of whether they are ready to walk out of the facility.
>> Similar reasoning, group is aware that they have donated blood, yet unable to take any action.

(E) People who are being treated for schizophrenia are not good judges of whether they should continue their medical treatments.
>> People aware regarding treatment. Similar flow.

This reasoning is based on one critical assumption that group is unaware about presence of noxious fumes. Negating this, makes the reasoning to fail.
I would like you to critically analyse the reasoning..
Thanks..

Hey Praveen,

Interesting logic, but it's made me come to dislike the writing of this question. My guess is that the answer is C here, only because that would be the likeliest based on how these questions are written (i.e. the hope is you'll pick B, because it SOUNDS the most different). And I do see what you're saying, that the idea could be people become unable to make an intelligent decision because of some bias.

HOWEVER, the central premise around which you built this argument doesn't exist either in the stem or the answer choice, so it cannot be the issue. If that IS the issue around which the question is built, it's a deeply flawed question.

In the stem, it never says the drivers are not aware of being sleep deprived. In fact, the idea seems to be that they know they are sleep deprived, but they DO NOT understand the consequences of that fact, and drive anyway. In the example you listed, the workers may or may not be aware of the fact that they are working with noxious fumes. The important part is that they ignore the consequences of that fact, and continue working. That sounds EXACTLY like the stem, not different at all. Noxious fumes are poisonous, and to that extent, they likely would have the same effect as "being faint" would (i.e. you no longer can make an intelligent decision about your safety).

By this logic, B is still the most unlike the stem. Instead of some outside force causing the bias (schizophrenia/blood donation/fumes/alcohol/sleep deprivation), it's merely an internal bias against something (math).

To summarize, I would guess the writer of this question wants the answer to be C, because B is such an obvious trap (because it LOOKS so different). But I don't think it's well crafted enough to be convincing in that way, because B does differ in a fundamental way from the stem.

Argument?

-tommy

P.S. Also, this question was listed as a Main Point Question, which it isn't. If that was part of the way it was presented on the page it came from, it would lead me to believe even more deeply it's a flawed question.

[quote="TommyWallach"]
By this logic, B is still the most unlike the stem. Instead of some outside force causing the bias (schizophrenia/blood donation/fumes/alcohol/sleep deprivation), it's merely an internal bias against something (math).
quote]

Hii Tommy Wallach,
I must appreciate your logic.It seems perfect, and can be taken as make or break point for options.I agree, the correct answer should be B.
Anyways, it has been a great learning solving this question.

Thanks for your logic Wallach..

Same to you Praveen! It was your extended take on the question that made me really consider it deeply. Well done!

-t

another reason for B

In all the choices it has stated that the group is aware but they can't judge it properly.
This Judgment is related to their own safety/benefits i.e. within their group, it will affect the subset of people who drink/donated blood etc.

But in option B, it is even for those who like arithmetic, the judgment is not within their group only.
i.e. it will affect the whole set of Elementary school students.

Another vote for B.

Try to rephrase each choice according to the structure of "Most drivers think they can tell when they are about to fall asleep, but they cannot."

You can rephrase for choice A, C, D and E. But not B.
A: Most people think they can tell when they are too drunk to drive, but they cannot
C: Most industrial workers think they know when they should stop working, but they cannot.
D: Most people who have just donated blood think they can tell when they are ready to walk out, but they cannot.
E: Most people who are being treated for schizophrenia think they can tell when they can halt their medical treatments, but they cannot.

Can you do that with B?

First, thanks Ravi for this post. IMO B.

Second, it is definitly a Main Point Question and not a FLAW one. Read the question stem - Each of the following illustrates the principle that the passage illustrates.

When ppl are having some effect of some cause then they show behavioral changes in stimuly and concentration. ppl are poor in this selfawreness.

So, it follows some action is taken on/by ppl and some judgement on doing something is then asked. We need to check this logic. Now, lets check the choices:

(A) People who have been drinking alcohol are not good judges of whether they are too drunk to drive. [Show behavioral changes in stimuly and concentration - Yes]
(B) Elementary school students who dislike arithmetic are not good judges of whether multiplication tables should be included in the school’s curriculum. [Show behavioral changes in stimuly and concentration - No]
(C) Industrial workers who have just been exposed to noxious fumes are not good judges of whether they should keep working. [Show behavioral changes in stimuly and concentration - Yes]
(D) People who have just donated blood and have become faint are not good judges of whether they are ready to walk out of the facility. [Show behavioral changes in stimuly and concentration - Yes]
(E) People who are being treated for schizophrenia are not good judges of whether they should continue their medical treatments. [Show behavioral changes in stimuly and concentration - Yes]

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.