GMAT Critical Reasoning #2 LIVE w/GMAT Ninja: Beyond Strengthen, Weaken, & Assumption Questions
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ก.ค. 2024
- The second video on techniques for conquering #GMAT critical reasoning, featuring fill-in-the-blank, evaluate the argument, and other variations on GMAT strengthen, weaken, and assumption questions.
This is EP2 of #GMATNinja CR Series. Recorded LIVE on November 22, 2017. Questions used in this video can be found at bit.ly/2O2BBYO. For more on #GMATNinja tutoring, visit www.gmatninja.com.
EP1: Strengthen, Weaken, & Assumption Questions • GMAT Critical Reasonin...
EP2: fill-in-the-blank, evaluate the argument, and other off-beat question types • GMAT Critical Reasonin...
Want to get email reminders of our TH-cam sessions, sign up for our video email notifications gmatclub.com/lists/?p=subscri...
Subscribe to our TH-cam Channel to Get Free 7-day Access to #GMATClub Forum Quiz Subscription / @gmatclub Subscribe and then follow the instructions posted here gmatclub.com/google_verify.php
0:00 Intro & Agenda
2:08 Recap: 3 Core Techniques to be used in Critical Reasoning
6:35 Question #1
13:24 Question #2
25:14 Question #3
32:21 Question #4
40:50 Question #5
#GMATVerbal #GMATCR #CriticalReasoning #GMATPrep #GMATStudy - บันเทิง
i wish there were more Live from you! It helped me alot in CR
Fantastic video. I've got much better at assumption now.
Questions from the doc file -
1. Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms are prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes on street corners. Since virtually everyone has access to a private telephone, these alarm boxes have outlived their usefulness. Therefore, we propose to remove the boxes. Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect?
(A) The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from.
(B) Maintaining the fire alarm boxes costs Springfield approximately five million dollars annually.
(C) A telephone call can provide the fire department with more information about the nature and size of a fire than can an alarm placed from an alarm box.
(D) Responding to false alarms significantly reduces the fire department's capacity for responding to fires.
(E) On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones in Springfield are out of service.
2. Exposure to certain chemicals commonly used in elementary schools as cleaners or pesticides causes allergic reactions in some children. Elementary school nurses in Renston report that the proportion of schoolchildren sent to them for treatment of allergic reactions to those chemicals has increased significantly over the past ten years. Therefore, either Renston's schoolchildren have been exposed to greater quantities of the chemicals, or they are more sensitive to them than schoolchildren were ten years ago.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The number of school nurses employed by Renston's elementary schools has not decreased over the past ten years.
(B) Children who are allergic to the chemicals are no more likely than other children to have allergies to other substances.
(C) Children who have allergic reactions to the chemicals are not more likely to be sent to a school nurse now than they were ten years ago.
(D) The chemicals are not commonly used as cleaners or pesticides in houses and apartment buildings in Renston.
(E) Children attending elementary school do not make up a larger proportion of Renston's population now than they did ten years ago.
3. Capuchin monkeys in Venezuela often rub a certain type of millipede into their fur. Secretions of these millipedes have been shown to contain two chemicals that are potent mosquito repellents, and mosquitoes carry parasites that debilitate the capuchins. The rubbing behavior is rare except during the rainy season, when mosquito populations are at their peak. Therefore monkeys probably rub millipedes into their fur only because doing so helps protect them against mosquitoes.
Which of the following would be most useful to determine in order to evaluate the argument?
(A) Whether the two chemicals provide any protection for millipedes against their own predators
(B) Whether the type of millipede used by the capuchin monkeys in Venezuela is found in other parts of the world.
(C) Whether animals other than capuchins rub insects of any kind into their fur
(D) Whether the only time millipedes are readily available to capuchins is during rainy season
(E) Whether secretions of any other insects accessible to capuchins contain chemicals that repel the mosquitoes
4. Which of the following most logically completes the argument?
Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields. In consequence, Utrania oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic condition, together with less restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because __________.
A. the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.
B. the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proportion of Utranian's who own automobiles.
C. most of the investment in the oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources.
D. new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.
E. many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.
Pls include 5th one as well
Hey Charles, many thanks for the highly informative content.
Thank you for this!
Great..polishes my knowledge
Thank you Charles ;)
Question 5: Selection D. If you do not have any restrictions on all of any given pollutants that reach the North Sea then there undoubtedly wouldn't be excessive restrictive controls. In fact, you could argue that almost nothing would be restricted, ergo not excessively restricted.
the problem in question 2 arises due to the phrase "proportion of schoolchildren sent to them for treatment ".
children : nurse
or
children : total number of children
Last question was absolutely berserk
Is there a cause and effect video by Charles ?
Please share the link in the reply section, need urgently though. Thanks!
Hi Charles, thank you for these great videos. I have a doubt in question 2 in which you talked about two ways to negate the answer choice. I do not think the first way is correct because that changes the segment of people we are talking about. The option only talks about 'Children who have allergic reactions to the chemicals'. We cannot say anything about children who do not have allergic reactions to the chemicals. Is my understanding correct?
Are these previous OG or Verbal guide questions?
One doubt in question number 2, the nurses' evidence is about the proportion, which I hooked onto at first sight, so definitely has to do with that, the proportion of schoolchildren that the nurses were dealing with increased, that can happen if the number of schoolchildren increases, as we have in option c, but the proportion can also increase if the the number of nurses decreases, right, so I was stuck between A and C and ended up choosing A, where am I going wrong?
Scored a perfect 5/5 after struggling with CR for quite sometime.
Thanks Charles!!
That's amazing. Stay SUBSCRIBED. Keep learning and improving.
Great content from Charles as always. Just a question for #4: I shied away from the correct answer because I felt there were too many "loops to jump" in the answer choice. We had to assume that 1) a considerable amount of those automobiles were petrol-based not electric and 2) the consumption of petrol from automobiles was of a significant proportion of the overall consumption of petrol by the country that an increase in automobiles would actually cause the exports to fall.
I would agree with your assessment that that answer choice requires a number of assumptions that are not very typical of the GMAT. However, none of the other choices seem to work so I hear you’re choosing the best among terrible ones. BB.
PS. Do you feel another answer choice could be working in this case? I see a lot of others being way out of scope 🤷
What if we read Question #4 here as WHAT will result in the higher exports (rapid development of fields or new technology) rather than whether or not RAPID DEVELOPMENT will result in the higher exports? Is there a mistake in reading the question that way?
Reading it the first way makes me choose D, but I understand the logic for B in reading the passage the second way.
Yes, me too. It relied upon the assumption that automobiles WILL use up majority of the oil. I chose D thinking the conclusion is probably hinting that it is premature to assume its "the new fields" not "old revived fields" that have led to increased exports.
I find it confusing sometimes when I reason with the conclusion in two different ways, making two different answer choices seem logical based upon which part of the conclusion I need to focus. Can someone from GMAT Club assist me in solving this sort of issue?
for question 1 just beacuse calles be traced are they videod? how would the fire department know if there was a fire? and if the fire department gets a better idea of the fire by phone( which may then give them a better idea of how to deal with it) than from an alarm box that seems to suggest that calling is better and therefore makes the alarm box in a sense unneccessary wouldnt that then strenthen the argument of removing the alarm box?
The fire dept does not know if there is a fire unless they get a call... but C is going outside of the scope - we actually don't know the exact functionality of the fire alarm box. C suggests it may not have a voice feature but that's what option C says - the premise does not state it and implies it is a "call" but this is all to confuse you because the main argument and issue is not about effectiveness of the phone or a fire alarm box but rather REDUCING PRANK CALLS - this option does not say anything about prank calls :-)
The last one wasn’t obvious. I thought E was better. Please explain
Hey Charles, On question 3, Wouldn't it help evaluate if there were other insects that were mosquito repellent as well. That would prove that if monkeys are using something for mosquito repellent, it could be anything else as well?
Check Charles's written explanation to this questions here gmatclub.com/forum/capuchin-monkeys-in-venezuela-often-rub-a-certain-type-of-millepede-in-63447.html#p1973160. If you still have queries, you can tag Charles in that thread.
31:07
Thank me later!
hahahahahhahaha thank you good sir
It cracked me mate hahahhaha
hahahahaah i was not expecting it
lol, i actually scrolled down the comments in search of this
First, thanks for these great webinars. I am not sure what I am missing here but definitely I cannot find the right answers. Even I reduce to two choices in most questions, I end up picking the wrong choice. Either I don't pay attention to the critical words or my vocabulary is not not that strong to analyze these questions. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Word power made easy by Norman Lewis is a magical book
By the way, greetings from Venezuela :)
Thank you :-) and Welcome to the GMAT Club's TH-cam Channel. Make sure to subscribe to be notified of new Videos.
Should i send some food?
I don't understand why you chose option C for question number 2. I could agree if the answer says: "Children who have alergic reactions to the chemicals are MORE likely to be sent to a schoold nurse now...". This idea would support the conclusion, wouldn't be?
Hi. You can find a more detailed and alternate explanation to Question 2 here: gmatclub.com/forum/exposure-to-certain-chemicals-commonly-used-in-elementary-schools-as-28474.html
Same doubt
I am falling in the same question!!!
The number of children who are sent to the nurse has remained constant over the last 10 years. The argument assumes this in order to conclude that there has most definitely been an increase in the exposure and not in the number of children being sent to the nurse.
@@watergalmansi so are you saying that the conclusion is contracting the evidence? I was confused. It looks strange to me when the conclusion is countering the conclusion (based on your explanation) but they are connected by "therefore" which is a cause-effect adverb. As far as I understand, the assumption is like the bridge that links the evidence to the conclusion. But it's not the case here. Please help. I highly appreciate it.
Q4 E should be the ans....it clearly states that new field will produce less oil hence its premature to conclude that exports will increase. You mentioned just the opposite why???
you can check forum discussion of this question where you can see analysis of Charles as well as other experts. If you still have doubts, you can post them in the same thread gmatclub.com/forum/utrania-was-formerly-a-major-petroleum-exporter-but-in-recent-decades-143975.html
Admittedly, I was certainly going back and forth between B and E. But I am still not convinced the answer is B. If a subject CAN actually cause environmental damage, then you wouldn't be AVOIDING controls, you would actually encourage them. OTOH, you would be able to avoid controls, if not lessen them, based on whether they even affect the North Sea by getting there at all. Hmmm
You are talking about Question 5 for the rest of us who were not there watching it with you :-)
You can see more discussions of that specific question here: gmatclub.com/forum/at-a-recent-conference-on-environmental-threats-to-the-north-sea-most-53635.html
And it is definitely a hard one based on 4,000 attempts.
A bit late to the party here (considering I was 19 when you commented); but I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who struggled between B and E hahaha. In fact it is the only question I got incorrect. Anyway, I hope you had a great exam, manifesting the same for me 🤞
It all worked out in the end :) Best of luck!!@@YTProductions270
A question about the monkey one: the passage states a specific type of millipede and the correct answer doesn't say "this specific" or something along those lines. Why does it not matter that the choice doesn't say the specific type of millipede? It could be any millipede.
I chose E cause of this and thought the monkeys may use one of these other insects at other times. Also a key word was "peak" time of mosquitoes so the monkeys surely would need to use other forms of repellent at other times when the mosquitoes were not at peak.
Yea... I also chose E....
Where is #3 video of CR? Do anybody has a link?
Not exactly CR but this is the final one of the series-
th-cam.com/video/JLAJ_drP8UM/w-d-xo.html
there is none
Hi, I'm not super convinced about choosing B in the 5th question. The passage says those countries favoured restrictions irrespective of whether the damage can be attributed to the pollutants. So then how does it matter for us to prove or show that a substance causes environmental damage when they are favouring controls regardless of the environmental damage they cause.? Please help me out here.
Hi, the conclusion asked us how can we have less restrictive controls and earlier in the passage it was stated that the countries wanted uniform controls wether or not it was harmful for the environment so in order to have les restrictive controls we have to alter some parameters that was proposed by the countries which is having control over substances or effluents that was harmful for the environment in that way it will be less restrictive and the countries would be able to protect the North Sea, this is what i understood and choose B
1/5 Correct, I should Quit! :( Should I read the CR Bible from PowerScore? I am hopeless, CR was my highest score in Diagnostic Test!
Dont quit! Yes CR Bible is a fantastic resource. Keep learning from the good sources.
I don’t understand why the last question answer cannot be C..
(C) the countries favoring uniform controls are those generating the largest quantities of effluents
Perhaps it's better to post your concerns OA in the forum discussion of this question. Here is the link gmatclub.com/forum/at-a-recent-conference-on-environmental-threats-to-the-north-sea-most-53635.html
C is out of scope here. If it helps 😂
There’s nothing in the passage that would indicate any kind of a relationship between size or producers and there’s no way to tie it with the passage or the logic. B and D are closer together than C. However “All” in D is a giveaway that it is wrong.
I am getting 610 in the last mocks ...what can i do to hit the 700 in less than a month? With a full time job? Definitely need improvement in the verbal part! Thanks!
Study as much as you can
Were you able to do it? If yes, please share your strategy. Thanks :D
My pipe gives 10+iq to anyone who blows it. It will definitely help you.
@@ankitmahajan4036 creepy
If I start taking notes, I will easily waste a minute on the question. Not sure how taking notes helps in CR, because if you can't write it in short form (have to use their words not yours) then you are just writing the actual passage itself, which is good to learn concepts but not in a time based exam. If you find the sentence too complicated maybe you can write it in simpler words (the only place where notes maybe useful) but that will again be writing the passage in your own words and you may oversimplify what the author wants to say ...
critical reasoning is soooo annoying
Yes logic is difficult for females, I agree.
@@ankitmahajan4036 same with males
@@kathleenng924 lol you mean you wish
Respecting different genders, races, etc is difficult for Ankit