QUESTION: 97

In 1980, 18% of American families lived under the poverty line. In 1990, only 12% of families lived under the poverty line. But that doesn’t mean fewer families were living in poverty. Indeed, the statistics hide the fact that more families were actually living in destitution. The difference in percentages appears because the poverty line was redefined and the income level was reduced. Thus, many families were above the poverty line even though they did not earn any more income. Which of the following statements, if true, would most strengthen this argument?

This kind of statistical manipulation is appalling.
A nationwide recession occurred in 1980 and an economic boom occurred in the 1990s.
Republicans were in power in 1980, whereas Democrats were in power in 1990.
The poverty line is regularly adjusted (income level raised) to account for inflation.
The number of welfare recipients in 1990 was 11% higher than in 1980.

Answer(s): D

Explanation:

Including the fact that the poverty line is regularly raised to account for inflation would significantly strengthen the conclusion that more families were living in poverty in 1990 despite the lower percentage of families under the poverty line. Choice a is an opinion that expresses anger at statistical manipulation but does not provide a premise that would further support the conclusion. Choice b offers information that might help account for a normal difference in the number of families living in poverty, but the passage doesn’t argue that fewer families were in poverty in 1990; rather, it argues the opposite. Choice c is essentially irrelevant. Democrats and Republicans may have certain agendas and institute certain social policies, but this is not relevant unless the reader knows a specific Democratic or Republican measure taken to affect the poverty level. Choice e suggests that many more poor people needed assistance in 1990 than 1980, but it is essentially irrelevant without further information showing the correlation between welfare recipients and the poverty line; it may be an apples-to- oranges comparison. You would need to know if any significant changes in welfare policy occurred in the interim.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 98

Kylie eats at Moe’s Diner every Thursday, but last Thursday she ate at Joe’s. On Friday, she was sick to her stomach. It must have been the food at Joe’s.
Which of the following is the best criticism of this argument?

It does not take into consideration other possible causes.
It confuses cause and effect.
It assumes that she would not have gotten sick eating the same food at Moe’s.
It does not identify the specific type of illness.
It does not describe how long the illness lasted.

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

Kylie’s stomachache could have been caused by any number of factors other than the food at Joe’s. Perhaps she ate or drank something that evening that did not agree with her. Perhaps she was nervous or anxious about something and that caused her stomach to be upset. Perhaps she caught the stomach flu.
Reversing causation is not possible, so choice b is incorrect. The argument does not necessarily assume she wouldn’t have gotten sick eating the same food at Moe’s (choice c); the passage doesn’t say what she ate or whether she even could have eaten the same thing at Moe’s. The only assumption here is that she was sickened by the food at Joe’s. The argument does not specify the type of illness (choice d) or describe how long it lasted (choice e), but these are not the best criticisms of the argument.
Knowing more about the kind of illness she had might help us rule out food poisoning or other food related illnesses, but the best criticism is clearly a.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 99

Brianna’s has been feeling jittery over the last three weeks. She has also been putting in extra hours at work, sometimes pulling double shifts. To stay alert, she has been drinking six or seven cups of coffee a day rather than her usual two or three cups. The jitters are interfering with her ability to do her work, so she has decided to stop drinking coffee altogether to eliminate the jitters. All of the following are valid criticisms of Brianais’s plan of action EXCEPT

the jitters may be due to lack of sleep, not excessive caffeine.
the jitters may be worsened by her total withdrawal from caffeine.
Brianais has never had the jitters before.
Brianais only gets the jitters when she drinks too much coffee.
the jitters may be caused by anxiety due to personal problems or stress at work.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

Because she has never had the jitters before, it is important for Brianais to try to do something to stop them. Therefore, this is not a criticism of her plan of action. The other options, however, all point out reasons why her plan of action may not be effective. If the jitters are caused by lack of sleep (choice a) or anxiety (choice e), then her plan will fail. Similarly, if her jitters worsen by a total withdrawal from caffeine (choice b), her plan will also fail. The fact that Brianais often gets the jitters when she drinks too much coffee (choice d) suggests that Brianais does not need to stop drinking coffee altogether; she just needs to cut back to her regular amount.

Reveal Solution Next Question

QUESTION: 100

Pop singer Clive Jones has been nominated for six Grammy Awards and his new album is enjoying its eighth consecutive week at number one on the charts. It is safe to say that Jones is today’s best pop artist.

Which of the following assumptions is most pivotal to this argument?

Jones’s previous albums were also chart-toppers.
Jones’s next album will outsell his current release.
Grammy nominations and record sales are accurate measures of an artist’s greatness.
Jones will win several of the Grammy Awards for which he has been nominated.
Jones is popular with both fans and music critics.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

The unstated assumption that connects the premise to the conclusion in this argument is that Grammy nominations and record sales are accurate measures of an artist’s greatness. Obviously, this is a highly debatable assumption, but it does provide the necessary link between the premise and the conclusion. The success of Jones’s previous albums (choice a) and his next album (choice c) are irrelevant to the conclusion, which is focused on his success today. Jones may or may not win those Grammy awards (choice d), but that is essentially irrelevant as well; it does not logically connect the premise to the conclusion. Jones’s popularity with both fans and critics (choice e) is important, but it likewise does not provide a logical connection.

Reveal Solution Next Question

Free GMAT SECTION 3: VERBAL ABILITY Exam Braindumps (page: 25)

QUESTION: 97

Explanation:

QUESTION: 98

Explanation:

QUESTION: 99

Explanation:

QUESTION: 100

Explanation: