GMAT Verbal: Does that Word Mean What You Think?
August 6, 2012
As anyone who has spent any time on GMAT Sentence Correction can tell you, the English language is complex. SC problems will frequently test idioms and tricky verb tenses, among other things. But despite a few exceptions (do you know the difference between economic and economical?), subtle shifts in the meanings of similar words aren’t usually tested in GMAT sentences. They are, however, tested on Critical Reasoning and Analytical Writing prompts.
Assumptions on the GMAT occur when the scope of discussion shifts between the evidence and the conclusion. In an earlier article, I discussed a stimulus involving burgers. One such “scope shift” in that article was that the evidence discussed cholesterol, while the conclusion discussed health in general; another involved evidence about a price reduction and a conclusion about increased consumption of burgers. Some of these are easier to spot than others, but all of them involve looking for changes in terms and terminology.
But sometimes, there is a change of meaning, even though the actual words are the same. Consider the following example:
Buddy claims he hurt his back lifting a heavy box of yogurt onto the store’s shelves. However, he was in the “diet” section of the store, stocking shelves with light yogurt. Clearly the only boxes he lifted were light; his claim for workers compensation must be a fabrication.
This argument is, of course, absurd! But if you’re locked into the GMAT mode of thinking (which is a good thing!) you might wonder why. This problem doesn’t seem to shift scope—both the evidence and the conclusion talk about the yogurt being light, right?
The key is that the author is “equivocating,” a technical term for using the same word with different meanings. “Light” here means “Diet” in the evidence but “Not Heavy” in the conclusion—that’s a pretty big gap, leading to deeply flawed reasoning. This pattern isn’t terribly common on GMAT problems, but it shows up from time to time, usually on Flaw questions. Keep your eyes peeled for words with multiple, ambiguous, or unclear meanings on the GMAT, and on today’s question of the day, an AWA prompt.
The following appeared in an internal memo for the Weekly Globe newspaper.
The proposal to reduce the celebrity section of our print edition from 6 pages weekly to 2 pages is misguided. The celebrity pages on our website average more hits per article than does any other section of our website; clearly the public is most interested in celebrity news. The proposed change would not only hurt our profits, but also betray our dedication to serving the public’s interests.
Discuss how well reasoned…
Post your analysis below, and we’ll let you know if there is anything you missed.
GMAT Critical Reasoning: The Denial Test
July 7, 2012
In your GMAT preparation you have probably learned to tackle critical reasoning assumption questions by identifying the conclusion of the argument, followed by the evidence and then looking for the missing link between these, which will be the central assumption. However, you have also probably encountered GMAT problems in which you either cannot figure out what the assumption is before you go to the answer choices or the assumption you found is not listed as an option. When this happens you want to be ready with a backup strategy.
The standard backup strategy for assumption questions – and do keep in mind this should not be used as a primary strategy, since it is more time consuming than the usual approach – is the denial test.
The denial test is based on the idea that the assumption is something that must be true in order to link the evidence to the conclusion. Another way to think about this is that if the assumption were not true, the evidence would no longer lead to the conclusion; that is, the argument would fall apart.
Therefore, as long as you have identified both the conclusion and evidence you can apply the denial test by negating each answer choice. Once you negate the option, see if the argument can still be true, even though the answer choice is false. If the argument cannot be true once the choice has been negated, you have found your assumption
For example, in the argument “poisons are harmful, therefore chemical X is harmful,” the conclusion is “chemical X is harmful” and the evidence is “poisons are harmful.” If an answer choice for the assumption said “chemical X is a poison,” we would negate this by making it “chemical X is not a poison.” If we know that chemical X is not a poison, then knowing that poisons are harmful tells us nothing about chemical X and the argument falls apart. Thus, we have found our assumption.
By using this strategy on GMAT test day when you get stuck on an assumption question you will be able to find the right answer without either guessing or using a method that is not working for you on that problem. Give it a try on the question below.
Question:
Politician: It is important for members of the State Assembly to remember that Governor Norman’s proposed new state thruway was part of her platform during her landslide re – election campaign last year. This means that if the thruway plan is defeated, its opponents will have much to answer for in next November’s State Assembly elections.
The politician’s argument relies upon which of the following assumptions?
| o | A. | Many of those who voted for Governor Norman oppose the thruway proposal. |
| o | B. | The thruway proposal is likely to be defeated by the State Assembly. |
| o | C. | Many of those who voted for Governor Norman supported the thruway proposal. |
| o | D. | Everyone who voted for Governor Norman last year will vote in the State Assembly elections. |
| o | E. | Those members of the State Assembly who oppose the thruway proposal do not have valid reasons for opposing it. |
Answer:
The question stem asks us to identify an assumption. Read the stimulus and find the evidence and conclusion. How do they differ? The assumption holds the evidence and conclusion together despite their apparent differences.
When the Governor won by a landslide, her platform included a thruway proposal. Based on this evidence, the politician concludes that if the thruway plan is shot down in the State Assembly, those responsible for its defeat will be in big trouble come election time.
The author assumes that the Governor won because her platform included a thruway proposal. But for all we know, the Governor may have won despite, not because of, the proposal. If the November threat to thruway opponents is real, it must be true that many of those who contributed to the landslide also support the project.
Choice (C) is a perfect replica of the paraphrase above. If, in fact, many who voted for Norman support the thruway, then the politician’s conclusion is surely reasonable — opponents of the thruway may be in hot water with the voters, at least over this issue.
Choice (A) is the exact denial of correct Choice (C). The fact that many of Norman’s supporters oppose the thruway would substantially weaken the politician’s argument.
Choice (B) goes beyond the scope of the argument by assessing the thruway proposal’s chances. The argument is based on the hypothetical “If it is defeated . . .” So even if it is not likely to be defeated, the threat may still be real should the defeat actually occur. The word if ensures that the chance of defeat plays no role in the validity of the argument.
Choice (D) is also not necessary to the argument. Even if not everyone who voted for the Governor last year votes in the State Assembly elections, enough of them may vote to cause trouble for thruway opponents — if those voters support the project.
Choice (E) is irrelevant to the argument. No matter what reasons the members of the State Assembly have for opposing the thruway, the Governor’s voters may not forgive them for a thruway defeat. Nothing regarding the validity of the opposition is required here.
The answer is C
Choosing the Right Assumption on the GMAT
March 4, 2012
The GMAT tests your ability to focus on detail. And the GMAT frequently provides trap answer choices and distorted version of the text to mislead testers who aren’t paying attention. But as a general rule, assumptions on the Critical Reasoning section aren’t going to be traps; if the testmaker offers you a clear assumption, they want you to take it, not nitpick your way to a different answer. Consider the following prompt. Once you’ve done so, try to predict an answer before reading on.
A group of nutritionists have expressed alarm at a recent marketing campaign for the Big and Beefy, a hamburger notorious for it’s high cholesterol. The steeply reduced price of the Big and Beefy, they claim, will harm the nation’s health.
Which of the following is an assumption made by the nutritionists’ argument?
In a very subtle way, the authors shift the scope of the argument. They tell us that the burger is high in cholesterol, then go on to talk about negative health impact—skipping the step where they establish that cholesterol is unhealthy! And some GMAT assumptions do, in fact, rely on the omission of ‘obvious’ facts. But before you start looking for such subtleties with a fine tooth comb, make sure you’re not missing the forest for the trees.
There is a gaping hole in this argument: for a burger to hurt the nation’s health, people need to eat it. The nutritionists are assuming that the low price will induce people to set aside their salad forks and purchase a high-cholesterol burger. And until that assumption is addressed, details about cholesterol are unlikely to matter. When you’re predicting an answer and scanning for a match, the big assumption is the assumption that you should be looking for to save time and improve accuracy.
Assumptions: GMAT and Otherwise
February 27, 2012
Sometimes you stumble upon something that is too full of coincidence to pass up. Inc. recently published an online article that seems written with the GMAT in mind: Have you checked your assumptions lately?
I have concluded that you’ll find this editorial particularly interesting because of two pieces of evidence: (1) you are reading a GMAT blog, and (2) the GMAT verbal section contains Critical Reasoning questions. Of course, now I have to ask why, based on those two pieces of evidence, have I come to the conclusion that you will find this Inc. e-snippet interesting? Well, the only way that this evidence will lead to this conclusion is because of my underlying assumptions. Can you tease out those assumptions? If so, then you are looking good for assumption family CR questions come Test Day. If not, let me help you…
For all Critical Reasoning arguments presented on the GMAT, the author always gives evidence and forms a conclusion based on that evidence (not necessarily in that order but those parts are always there). However, there is a third portion of an argument’s construction that the author does not give, and that third portion is precisely what test takers must identify in order to get 70% of GMAT CR questions correct: the assumptions.
In order for evidence to lead to a conclusion, an author must fundamentally believe certain things to be true. We are never explicitly told what those beliefs are, but we can identify them because of the two parts of the argument we are always given. Assumptions build a bridge between presented evidence and presented conclusion.
For me to conclude that you will like the article mentioned above as a result of the evidence I presented must mean that I assume you (1) reading a GMAT blog signals that you are interested in things I find interesting, at least in regard to the GMAT, and (2) you are at least somewhat familiar with what is on the GMAT itself and that familiarity is deep enough to mean you know about Critical Reasoning questions and the patterns within them—namely, the patterned way Assumption, Strengthen/Weaken, and Flaw questions are constructed and what it takes to deconstruct them. If I did not believe those two things were true, then I would have to come up with different evidence from which to derive my conclusion about your piqued interest. Get it? Great, now onto the article…
In the end, the author, a Harvard management professor by the name Robert S. KAPLAN (no relation, but what a great name), is simply making a case to identify and then weaken assumptions in order to avoid making poor decisions. Or, on the flip side, ensure that the decision you are making is a good one.
This is a lovely notion and it is one that studying for the GMAT will prepare you to undertake. It is always nice to be able to link, with support, items tested on the GMAT to real life beyond the admissions test. That sugar makes the medicine go down a little easier. See past posts for thoughts on GMAT Validity (here’s another), Sentence Correction, and the new Integrated Reasoning section. More to come on the usefulness and appropriateness of Data Sufficiency and Reading Comprehension questions.
Types of Critical Reasoning Questions
September 5, 2011
GMAT critical reasoning questions fall into a number of specific categories and knowing which type of problem is confronting you will be key to answering these questions correctly. Below, you will find a roster of the question types that will appear on the GMAT.
Assumption Questions
Assumption questions will ask you to identify the unstated piece of information that must be true for the author’s evidence to lead to their conclusion. Remember, that the right answer will be information, that if it were not true, would cause the author’s argument to no longer make sense.
Strenghten Questions
Strengthen questions require an answer choice that makes the argument more likely to be true. You want to find a new piece of evidence that provides support for the argument’s main point.
Weaken Questions
Weaken questions are the exact opposite of strengthen questions – you need to find an answer that makes the argument less likely to be true. The correct answer will be a piece of evidence that severs the link between the author’s evidence and conclusion.
Flaw Questions
Flaw questions are quite similar to weaken questions. However, instead of looking for an answer choice that introduces a new piece of evidence, you want to search for a choice that explains an inherent problem in the author’s reasoning.
Explain Questions
Explain questions will present you with two pieces of evidence that appear to contradict each other. Your goal is to find the answer that explains why no contradiction actually exists.
Inference Questions
Inference questions will provide you with a set of facts. You should accept these facts as true and assess each answer, looking for the choice that must also be true based on the evidence provided.
Bolded Statement Questions
Bolded statement questions will feature an argument, two portions of which are in boldface. Your goal is to identify the role in the argument played by each statement and the relationship between the statements. The role could be evidence, conclusion, conjecture, etc. and the statements could support each other or refute each other.
