Test: Additional Evidence - GMAT MCQ

Let's break down the answer choices and explain why (E) is the correct answer.

(A) draw on an analogy: The author does draw on an analogy by comparing a country's dependence on foreign trade to a dog living by eating its own tail. This analogy is used to emphasize the necessity of foreign trade for a country's economic well-being.

(B) appeal to historical fact: The author mentions that the United States has historically found most of its raw materials and customers within its own borders. This historical fact is used to support the author's claim that the U.S. has not been a great international trader.

(C) identify a cause and an effect: The author points out the cause and effect relationship between the lack of international trade and the consequences faced by the United States, such as the largest foreign debt in the world and foreign investors dominating the economy. This cause-effect relationship supports the author's point.

(D) suggest a cause of the current economic situation: The author implies that the United States' limited engagement in foreign trade is a cause of the current economic situation, specifically the foreign debt and the dominance of foreign investors. This suggestion of a cause supports the author's argument.

(E) question the ethical basis of an economic situation: This is the statement that does not align with the author's point of view. The author does not question the ethical basis of the economic situation resulting from the limited engagement in foreign trade. The focus is on the economic consequences and the necessity of foreign trade for a country's prosperity.

Therefore, the correct answer is (E) question the ethical basis of an economic situation.

This is an evidence question, so we're looking for answer that addresses an unstated assumption in the passage. The argument is that, because airlines are accountable to their customers, they will follow safety procedures comparable to those followed by the government-mandated ones.

Choice (A) is irrelevant: we're concerned with whether the safety procedures would be as thorough, not how much they would cost.

(B) is another irrelevant comparison, as we're concerned only with the effect of the shift in Guravia.

(C) might sound tempting, but it doesn't matter who does the work, it matters what standards are set by the organization (the government, or the airlines) who are accountable for it.

Choice (D) is somewhat supported by the passage, but this isn't an inference question. We're looking for evidence to close a loophole in the argument.

Choice (E) is what we're looking for. The argument claims that customers will hold airlines accountable, but if there is no way to know which airlines are following safety procedures, the argument would fall apart.

Choice (E) is correct.

It assesses your ability to evaluate an argument and identify the information that would be most useful to further evaluate the argument. Let's break down each answer choice and determine which one is most relevant in evaluating the argument:

(A) Whether the current figures for road accidents can be reduced by improving certain conditions such as lighting:

• This answer choice is not directly relevant to evaluating the argument. It focuses on improving conditions such as lighting to reduce road accidents, which is unrelated to the installation of electronic advertising signs.

(B) Whether the companies that install the electronic signs have official government approval to do so:

• This answer choice is also not directly relevant to evaluating the argument. It pertains to the approval of the companies installing the signs, which does not provide information about the impact of the signs on road safety.

(C) Whether more than 50% of the collisions that take place at junctions are fatal:

• This answer choice is potentially relevant to evaluating the argument. If a significant portion of the collisions at junctions are fatal, it suggests that the severity of accidents is a critical factor to consider when assessing road safety.

(D) Whether the companies being advertised by the electronic signs report increases in the number of customers that approach them:

• This answer choice is unrelated to evaluating the argument. It focuses on the impact of electronic signs on the companies being advertised, rather than on road safety.

(E) Whether the figures for accidents involving pedestrians are also the same for both types of junction:

• This answer choice is the most useful for evaluating the argument. By comparing the figures for accidents involving pedestrians at junctions with electronic signs and those without electronic signs, we can assess whether the presence of electronic signs has any impact on pedestrian safety.

In summary, answer choice (E) is the most useful for evaluating the argument because it directly addresses the impact of electronic advertising signs on pedestrian safety, which is an important aspect of road safety.

Let's go through each answer choice and analyze why (D) is the best choice.

(A) Native American legends from the American Northwest featuring enormous whales and large fish doesn't directly support the contention that Siberia was once connected to North America. These legends could be based on local folklore or other factors unrelated to a land bridge.

(B) The fact that people of coastal Siberia have features that distinguish them from people in the rest of Russia doesn't provide evidence of a land bridge. Physical differences between populations can arise from various factors, such as isolation or genetic variations within a population.

(C) The continued hunting of seals, walrus, and sea lions by hunters in both Siberia and coastal Alaska could indicate a shared cultural practice or ecological similarities between the two regions. However, it doesn't directly prove the existence of a land bridge or the migration of humans across it.

(D) Large animal fossils found in both Siberia and coastal Alaska that belong to identical species do support the contention that Siberia was once connected to North America. The presence of the same species of large animals in both regions suggests that there was once a land connection allowing for their migration.

(E) The fact that the Bering Strait connects the Arctic and Pacific Oceans over the polar ice cap doesn't provide direct evidence of a land bridge between Siberia and North America. The Bering Strait being a waterway doesn't imply a land connection in the past.

Therefore, option (D) is the best choice as it provides the most direct evidence supporting the contention that Siberia was once connected to North America. The presence of identical large animal fossils in both Siberia and coastal Alaska suggests a historical land connection, which could have allowed for the migration of humans and other species between the two regions.

The argument in the question is that infants aged 10 to 12 months, although they recognize the presence of the shiny object, do not choose to touch it. The argument concludes that infants of this age are not curious about foreign objects. The question asks us to establish which of the answer choices would be most useful in evaluating this argument.

(A) Whether the infants chosen for the experiment underwent screening that could eliminate those with vocal disabilities: This answer choice is irrelevant to evaluating the argument about infants' curiosity towards foreign objects. Vocal disabilities do not directly relate to curiosity or the decision to touch objects.

(B) Whether the remaining 10% of the infants chose to place the object in the vicinity of their mouths after touching it: This answer choice is also unrelated to the argument. It focuses on what the infants did after touching the object, rather than their initial decision not to touch it. It does not provide relevant information about their curiosity towards foreign objects.

(C) Whether such infants react with curiosity to stimuli that are presented to them in the form of audio signals: This answer choice is not directly related to the argument either. It addresses the infants' reactions to audio signals, which is different from their curiosity towards foreign objects.

(D) Whether infants aged 10 to 12 months have the ability to distinguish people familiar to them based on facial features alone: This answer choice is not relevant to the argument either. It pertains to the infants' ability to recognize familiar faces, which is unrelated to their curiosity towards foreign objects.

(E) Whether infants that age show a tendency to study objects of interest visually: This answer choice directly addresses the argument's focus on infants' curiosity towards foreign objects. If infants of this age show a tendency to visually study objects of interest, it would support the argument that their lack of curiosity towards the shiny object suggests they are not interested in foreign objects.

Therefore, answer choice (E) is the most useful in evaluating the argument, as it directly relates to the infants' behavior and curiosity towards foreign objects.

The given question pertains to the customs and practices of the Igbo people regarding the "bride wealth" system. The purpose of bride wealth in this context is to compensate the bride's family for the loss of a young and productive member. We are asked to identify the use of the bride wealth that aligns with this compensation intent.

Let's analyze each option:

(A) Put it in an interest-bearing account so that the family has a regular income in the form of interest.

• This option aligns with the compensation intent because by putting the bride wealth in an interest-bearing account, the bride's family can generate a regular income. This income can serve as a form of compensation for the loss of the bride's productivity and contribution to her natal family.

(B) Use it to get a young wife for a member of the bride's family.

• While this option may provide benefits to the bride's family, it does not directly align with the compensation intent mentioned in the question. It focuses on securing a young wife for a member of the bride's family rather than compensating for the loss of a young and productive member.

(C) Use it to buy gifts for the bride.

• While buying gifts for the bride may be a common practice in marriages, it does not directly address the compensation intent of the bride wealth system. It focuses on the bride's side, rather than compensating the bride's family for their loss.

(D) Use it for the conduct of the marriage.

• While using the bride wealth for the conduct of the marriage is a common practice, it does not directly address the compensation intent mentioned in the question. It pertains to the marriage ceremony itself rather than compensating the bride's family for their loss.

(E) Keep it for an emergency.

• Keeping the bride wealth for an emergency may provide financial security to the bride's family, but it does not directly align with the compensation intent of the bride wealth system. It focuses on future contingencies rather than compensating for the loss of a young and productive member.

Considering the explanations above, the option that aligns with the compensation intent of the bride wealth system is (A) Put it in an interest-bearing account so that the family has a regular income in the form of interest.

This question presents a disagreement between Gerrit and Saskia regarding the moral obligation of a retailer to sell a recording at a lower price due to a pricing mistake. Saskia disagrees with Gerrit's expectation of receiving the lower price, arguing that he was aware of the mistake and was trying to take advantage of it. The question asks which principle would most help justify Saskia's position.

Let's analyze each option:

(A) The price displayed on an item in a retail store morally constitutes an irrevocable offer to sell the item at that price.
This principle would support Gerrit's position, as it suggests that the retailer is obligated to sell the item at the displayed price. It does not align with Saskia's argument, so it is not the correct choice.

(B) Customers of retail stores are morally entitled to profit from any mistakes that the retailers make in marking prices.
This principle directly supports Gerrit's position, as it states that customers have the moral right to benefit from pricing mistakes. It contradicts Saskia's stance, so it is not the correct choice.

(C) Retailers are morally entitled to update marked prices periodically in order to reflect changes in manufacturers’ suggested prices.
This principle does not address the issue at hand. It discusses retailers' entitlement to update prices based on manufacturer suggestions, but it does not provide justification for the retailer's decision to correct a pricing mistake. Therefore, it is not the correct choice.

(D) Retailers are morally obligated to meet expectations about prices that they have intentionally encouraged their customers to hold.
This principle focuses on retailers meeting the expectations they have intentionally created regarding prices. While it addresses a retailer's obligations, it does not pertain directly to the pricing mistake situation described. Hence, it is not the correct choice.

(E) Retailers are morally obligated to sell an item to a customer at a mismarked price only if that customer was genuinely misled about the intended price by the mismarking.
This principle aligns with Saskia's position by suggesting that retailers are morally obligated to sell an item at a mismarked price only if the customer was genuinely misled by the pricing error. Since Gerrit was aware of the mistake, he was not genuinely misled, and therefore Saskia's position is supported by this principle. Hence, (E) is the correct choice.

It presents a situation where the school board president claims that voters rejected the school budget due to their dislike of a top-heavy administration. The question asks which investigation would be most useful in evaluating the board president's claim. Let's go through each option to determine the best choice.

(A) Comparing the number of administrators to the number in other districts: This investigation would provide information about the relative number of administrators in the district compared to other districts. While it could be useful for understanding the district's administrative structure, it doesn't directly evaluate the claim made by the board president.

(B) Adding up the salaries and benefits for all district administrators: This investigation would provide information about the financial cost of the administrative positions in the district. While it could be relevant to the budgetary concerns, it doesn't directly evaluate the claim made by the board president.

(C) Graphing five years of correlation between numbers of students and administrators: This investigation would examine the relationship between the number of students and the number of administrators over a five-year period. While it could provide some insights into the staffing levels, it doesn't directly evaluate the claim made by the board president.

(D) Surveying neighborhood districts to determine which budgets passed: This investigation would gather information on neighboring districts to determine if their budgets passed or not. While it could provide some context, it doesn't directly evaluate the claim made by the board president.

(E) Exit-polling voters to determine the reasons for their votes: This investigation involves surveying voters who rejected the school budget to understand their reasons for voting "no." This option directly addresses the claim made by the board president by collecting information on the specific reasons voters had for rejecting the budget. It would provide the most useful information to evaluate the claim.

Therefore, the most useful investigation in evaluating the board president's claim is option (E) Exit-polling voters to determine the reasons for their votes.

The argument states that Amazon announced huge discounts on many products two days before Thanksgiving and on Christmas. On Thanksgiving, $500 million worth of orders were placed, and on Christmas, $2 billion worth of orders were placed. The argument concludes that the average buyer on Amazon needs more than three days to make a purchase decision.

To evaluate the argument, we need to determine if the conclusion is valid or if there are other factors that could explain the difference in order values. Let's examine each answer choice:

(A) What was the mean value of all purchases made on Thanksgiving?
This answer choice is relevant because it provides information about the average purchase value on Thanksgiving. If the average value is significantly lower than $500 million, it could weaken the argument by suggesting that some buyers made larger purchases, thus reducing the average purchase decision time.

(B) What was the mean value of all purchases made on Christmas?
This answer choice is also relevant because it provides information about the average purchase value on Christmas. If the average value is significantly lower than $2 billion, it could weaken the argument by suggesting that some buyers made larger purchases, thus reducing the average purchase decision time.

(C) What percentage of the buyers received a bonus from their respective employers on Christmas?
This answer choice is not directly relevant to the argument. The argument is focused on the time needed to make a purchase decision, not on the bonus recipients.

(D) How does the sales volume of this Thanksgiving compare to last year's?
This answer choice is also not directly relevant to the argument. The argument is concerned with the average purchase decision time, not the comparison of sales volumes between different years.

(E) Both A and B
This answer choice includes both relevant pieces of information. By knowing the mean values of purchases on Thanksgiving and Christmas, we can evaluate whether the argument's conclusion about the average purchase decision time is valid.

Therefore, the correct answer is (E) Both A and B.

Let's go through each answer choice and determine which one is the most likely to yield significant information to evaluate the hypothesis.

(A) Determining what kind of wood is used to make the reeds used by jazz clarinetists.

• This information is unrelated to the hypothesis. The type of wood used to make the reeds does not directly address the issue of freshness or responsiveness.

(B) Determining whether jazz clarinetists make their reeds lose their freshness faster than do classical clarinetists.

• While this answer choice compares the impact of playing style (jazz vs. classical) on reed freshness, it does not directly address the hypothesis about the buildup of oil. It focuses more on the players rather than the reeds themselves.

(C) Determining whether identical lengths of reeds, of the same thickness, lose their freshness at different rates when put onto various brands of clarinets.

• This answer choice investigates whether the brand of the clarinet affects the rate of freshness loss in reeds. Although it explores an interesting variable, it doesn't directly evaluate the hypothesis about the buildup of oil.

(D) Determining whether rubbing various substances on the new reed causes them to lose their freshness.

• This answer choice directly addresses the hypothesis by investigating the impact of rubbing substances on reed freshness. If rubbing substances on the reed leads to a loss of freshness, it supports the hypothesis that oil buildup is responsible. If no significant changes occur, it would cast doubt on the hypothesis.

(E) Determining whether a fresh reed and one that has lost its freshness produce different qualities of sound.

• While this answer choice investigates the impact of freshness on sound quality, it does not directly evaluate the hypothesis about oil buildup. It focuses more on the subjective aspect of sound quality rather than the physical properties of the reed.

Based on the above analysis, (D) Determining whether rubbing various substances on the new reed causes them to lose their freshness is the most likely investigation to yield significant information to evaluate the hypothesis.