Analysts base their predictions on information they gather from many sources and the information from corporate disclosures is more accurate. Therefore the number of inaccurate predictions has not decreased because the information from other sources has not improved.

VeritasKarishma generis

My doubts in correct answer is:E) The more pieces of information corporations release, the more difficult it becomes for anyone to organize them in a manageable way

It may become difficult, however, it is not impossible, right? Thereby I eliminated this option. Is my inference wrong?

Hello,

in (D), are we supposed to assume that the accuracy of the other sources used before and after the new law introduction has been stable?

Because it could be that even though under the new law, corporates disclose more and more accurate information, other sources have generally deteriorated in accuracy, leading false predictions?

AjiteshArun

Hi Ajitesh,

thanks. But on the same note, following (E), just because things become more difficult, it doesn't mean that the reporting has to become less accurate necessarily. It could be that it is more difficult, but still the case that reports are as accurate as before. For example, I can increase the difficulty of entering a room which previously had no door by installing a door.

The door is an additional step making it more difficult to enter, but not it will not necessarily increase the fail rate of people who want to enter the room.

I am not given any information if this increase in difficulty will definetely lead to less accurate reports.

Really sorry for the stupid questions, but I am terrible at CR whereas i score consistenly high in CR and SC ... need to get the hang on it here

New laws imposed strict penalties for misleading info. Also they required increased amount and accuracy of information.

So analysts' predictions were expected to become more accurate.

But number of inaccurate analysts' predictions has not decreased.

What will explain this?

A) The new laws' definition of “misleading information” can be interpreted in more than one way.

We are not given that it is being interpreted incorrectly to continue to mislead. Even if that were the case, one would still wonder that given that corporations are required to increase the amount and accuracy of information, why hasn't the number of analysts' incorrect predictions decreased?

B) The new laws require corporations in all industries to release information at specific times of the year.

Irrelevant.

C) Even before the new laws were passed, the information most corporations released was true.

Even if information released was true, the new laws require more information to be released and for it to be not misleading (say one side of the story is told but not the other). One would expect the analysts's predictions to become more accurate.

D) Analysts base their predictions on information they gather from many sources, not just corporate disclosures.

If one source's accuracy has improved, one would expect the overall result to improve. It may not become perfect because other sources are not inaccurate but one would expect overall accuracy to improve.

E) The more pieces of information corporations release, the more difficult it becomes for anyone to organize them in a manageable way.

This tells us that new laws bring in new troubles too. Though info is more and accurate, the more pieces of info lead to more difficulty in organising. Hence, the analysts's predictions have not improved makes sense.

Answer (E)