Test: Weaken Argument - GMAT MCQ

Argument: As more consumers gain access to new technologies like the internet, demand for travel agents' services will be drastically reduced.

(A) Travel agents routinely use the internet and other new information technologies as sources for the information they obtain for their customers.

This answer choice supports the argument by acknowledging that travel agents already use the internet and new technologies. However, it does not weaken the argument because it doesn't address the issue of consumers having direct access to the information that was previously only available through travel agents.

(B) The amount of information available through the internet and other new information technologies is increasing faster than the capabilities of most consumers to process it.

This answer choice weakens the argument by suggesting that even though consumers have access to a vast amount of information, they may not have the ability or capacity to process and utilize it effectively. This implies that they may still rely on travel agents to gather and organize the information on their behalf.

(C) Many people use travel-related services, such as airlines and hotels, without consulting a travel agent.

This answer choice doesn't directly address the impact of new technologies on travel agents. While it suggests that some people already use travel-related services without consulting travel agents, it doesn't provide any information about the future trend or the impact of new technologies on demand for travel agents' services.

(D) The people who currently use the services of travel agents are also those most likely to gain access to new information technologies.

This answer choice strengthens the argument by suggesting that the current users of travel agents' services are likely to gain access to new technologies. However, it doesn't weaken the argument because it doesn't address whether these individuals would continue to rely on travel agents despite having access to new technologies.

(E) The internet and other new information technologies are currently used by a relatively small proportion of the population.

This answer choice weakens the argument by indicating that only a small proportion of the population currently uses the internet and new technologies. If the majority of the population doesn't have access to these technologies, then the impact on demand for travel agents' services may not be as significant as the argument assumes.

Therefore, the answer choice that most seriously weakens the argument is (B) - The amount of information available through the internet and other new information technologies is increasing faster than the capabilities of most consumers to process it.

The argument is based on the premise that opponents of incineration claim it is unsafe due to incidents involving unexpected releases of dangerous chemical agents at existing incinerators. The conclusion is that if the use of incineration increases without additional preventive measures, such releases will become more prevalent. We are asked to find the option that weakens this argument the most.

Let's evaluate each answer choice:

(A) At the two incinerators at which leaks were reported, staff had had only cursory training on the proper procedures for incinerating chemical waste.
This option weakens the argument by suggesting that the leaks were caused by a lack of proper training rather than inherent flaws in the incineration process. If the staff had received adequate training, the incidents of leaks might have been prevented, indicating that incineration itself may not be the problem. Therefore, this answer choice weakens the argument.

(B) Other means of disposing of chemical waste, such as chemical neutralization processes, have not been proven safer than incineration.
This option does not directly address the argument's concern about the prevalence of leaks or the lack of preventive measures in new incinerators. It introduces a comparison with chemical neutralization processes, but the argument focuses on incineration. Therefore, this option does not significantly weaken the argument.

(C) The capacity of existing incinerators is sufficient to allow for increased incineration of chemical waste without any need for new incinerators.
This option is irrelevant to the argument's concern about the safety of incineration and the potential increase in leaks. It only addresses the capacity of existing incinerators, without providing any information about safety measures or preventive measures in new incinerators.

(D) The frequency of reports of unexpected releases of chemical agents at newly built incinerators is about the same as the frequency at older incinerators.
This option weakens the argument by suggesting that the frequency of incidents at newly built incinerators is comparable to that of older incinerators. If the frequency is the same, it implies that there is no significant increase in incidents despite the lack of additional preventive measures in the new incinerators. Therefore, this option weakens the argument.

(E) In only three of the reported incidents of unexpected chemical leaks did the releases extend outside the property on which the incinerators were located.
This option does not directly address the argument's concern about the prevalence of leaks or the lack of preventive measures in new incinerators. It focuses on the extent of the releases and whether they extended outside the property. However, this information does not provide a strong weakening effect on the argument.

In summary, options (A) and (D) both weaken the argument, but option (A) weakens it more directly by suggesting that the leaks were caused by inadequate training rather than inherent flaws in incineration. Therefore, the correct answer is (A).

Let's analyze each option:

(A) It appeals to the authority of experts who cannot have known all the issues involved in the construction of the megatelescope.
This criticism suggests that the argument relies too heavily on the expertise of astronomers without considering the potential limitations or drawbacks of building the megatelescope. However, the argument itself doesn't explicitly appeal to the authority of experts, so this criticism is not the strongest.

(B) It does not identify those opposed to the development of the megatelescope.
This criticism points out that the argument fails to acknowledge the existence or perspectives of individuals who are against the development of the megatelescope. While it is a valid point, it is not the strongest criticism of the argument.

(C) It launches a personal attack on opponents of the megatelescope by accusing them of having a dangerous point of view.
This criticism argues that the argument resorts to personal attacks rather than engaging with the opposing viewpoints in a constructive manner. However, there is no personal attack in the argument, so this criticism is not the strongest.

(D) It does not distinguish between the economic and the intellectual sense of "benefit."
This criticism suggests that the argument fails to clarify whether the benefit mentioned refers to economic gains or intellectual advancement. While it highlights a potential ambiguity, it does not directly undermine the argument's reasoning.

(E) It does not show that the proposed megatelescope research is worthy of comparison with that of eminent scientists in its potential for applications.
This criticism is the strongest because it challenges the core of the argument's reasoning. The argument draws a parallel between the potential benefits of the megatelescope and the groundbreaking research of Maxwell, Newton, and Einstein. However, it fails to establish that the megatelescope research possesses a similar level of potential for applications. Therefore, option (E) is the strongest criticism.

In summary, the strongest criticism of the argument is (E) It does not show that the proposed megatelescope research is worthy of comparison with that of eminent scientists in its potential for applications.

The argument states that the increase in rose exports from 2.75 tons to 5 tons in one year indicates an upward trend in demand for roses. The question asks you to find the answer choice that undermines this conclusion the most. Let's evaluate each option:

(A) The demand in the international market for tulips produced in Hopland has not increased in the last two years.
This statement is about the demand for tulips, not roses. It does not directly affect the conclusion about the demand for roses. This answer choice can be eliminated.

(B) No new export markets have opened up in the last few years for the export of Hopland roses.
This statement suggests that there have been no new opportunities for exporting Hopland roses to new markets. However, it does not directly impact the conclusion that the demand for roses is increasing. This answer choice is not the most relevant to the conclusion and can be eliminated.

(C) It is generally very difficult to predict the actual demand for roses in the international market in a given year.
This statement acknowledges the difficulty in predicting the demand for roses accurately. However, it does not specifically undermine the conclusion that the demand for roses is increasing. This answer choice can be eliminated.

(D) For the first time in nearly a decade, Roseland, the largest exporter of roses in the international market, suffered an unexpected infestation on its rose plantations last year.
This statement introduces a significant event - an unexpected infestation - that affected the largest exporter of roses. This event is likely to have caused a decrease in the production or supply of roses from Roseland, which could have led to an increase in demand for roses from Hopland. Therefore, this answer choice undermines the conclusion that the increase in exports from Hopland indicates an upward trend in demand for roses. It weakens the argument the most and is the correct answer.

(E) In a recently published paper on the cosmetic benefits of flowers, scientists have claimed that jasmine flowers have significantly more cosmetic benefits than roses.
This statement introduces information about the cosmetic benefits of flowers but does not directly address the demand for roses. It does not undermine the conclusion that the demand for roses is increasing. This answer choice can be eliminated.

In summary, answer choice (D) weakens the argument the most by providing an alternative explanation for the increase in rose exports from Hopland.

Let's analyze the options and determine which one most seriously undermines the statement made by the nutritionist.

(A) The fact that the nutritionist's income is subsidized by a government agency committed to encouraging people to lose weight by adding daily exercise does not necessarily undermine the statement. It might indicate a potential bias, but it doesn't directly invalidate the findings of the study.

(B) This option indicates that all the patients had a very similar physical makeup and metabolic rate, two significant factors that affect the ability to lose weight. If this is true, it undermines the generalizability of the study's results. The effectiveness of the recommended diet and exercise approach might be limited to individuals with similar physical characteristics, and it might not apply to a broader population.

(C) The nutritionist's inability to come to an agreement with a colleague on what constitutes a healthy diet is not directly related to the effectiveness of the study's results. It might raise questions about the nutritionist's expertise or professional relationships but does not necessarily undermine the findings.

(D) If all of the nutritionist's patients incorporated exactly the same form of exercise to their daily routine, it does not directly undermine the effectiveness of the recommended diet and exercise approach. It might limit the study's exploration of different exercise methods, but it does not invalidate the positive outcomes observed.

(E) The fact that there were only eighty patients who participated in the nutritionist's weight loss study might raise concerns about the sample size and statistical significance. However, it does not directly undermine the statement itself.

Based on the above analysis, option (B) is the most serious undermining factor. It suggests that the results of the study might not be generalizable to individuals with different physical makeup and metabolic rates. Therefore, (B) is the correct answer choice.

The argument relies on the unstated assumption that no factor other than Gary’s driving speed might be responsible for the recent decrease in his fuel mileage; in other words, no other circumstances that might affect fuel mileage have changed recently. One effective way to weaken the argument would be to refute this assumption. Choice (E) accomplishes this by providing a convincing alternative explanation for the decrease.

The argument states that Bayside Aquarium plans to capture a great white shark to raise public awareness about its endangered status. However, it points out that most great white sharks do not survive in captivity for more than one month, suggesting that the plan would be a waste of resources. The conclusion is that the aquarium's financial resources would be better directed toward other preservation efforts.

Now let's analyze each answer choice:

(A) Bayside Aquarium’s shark habitat would resemble the species’ natural environment far more closely than the shark habitats provided previously at other facilities.
This option weakens the argument by suggesting that Bayside Aquarium has made significant improvements in creating a shark habitat that closely resembles the great white shark's natural environment. If the new habitat is designed to better accommodate the shark's needs, it could potentially increase the chances of the shark surviving in captivity for a longer period. Therefore, this weakens the claim that capturing the shark would be a waste of resources.

(B) Most visitors to the aquarium are already aware that the great white shark is an endangered species.
This option is irrelevant to the argument since it addresses the awareness of the visitors rather than the survivability of the shark or the allocation of resources. Whether or not visitors are aware of the great white shark's endangered status doesn't directly impact the argument.

(C) Certain other species of sharks are at greater risk of extinction than the great white shark.
This option also doesn't directly address the issue of the great white shark's survival in captivity or the allocation of resources. While it may be true that other species of sharks are more endangered, it doesn't weaken the argument that capturing a great white shark would be a waste of resources.

(D) The expense involved in capturing a great white shark is difficult to predict.
This option introduces uncertainty regarding the financial aspect of capturing a great white shark. However, it doesn't directly weaken the argument that the plan would be a waste of resources. The argument is concerned with the shark's survival in captivity, not the cost of capturing it.

(E) Bayside Aquarium’s popularity is due primarily to its large variety of sea life.
This option is also irrelevant to the argument. The popularity of the aquarium doesn't address the issue of capturing a great white shark or the allocation of resources.

Therefore, option (A) weakens the argument the most by suggesting that Bayside Aquarium has improved its shark habitat to closely resemble the shark's natural environment, increasing the likelihood of the shark's survival in captivity.

The argument: The coach for the Panthers predicts victory over the Cougars in an upcoming maxiball match. The chief reason for this prediction is that the Cougars' best defensive player will not be defending against Fonsica, who is the Panthers' highest scoring player.

We are asked to find the answer choice that casts the most doubt on the coach's prediction. In other words, we need to identify the option that weakens the link between the absence of the Cougars' best defensive player and the Panthers' victory.

Let's analyze each answer choice:

(A) The Panthers have defeated fewer opponents than the Cougars this year.
This information does not directly weaken the coach's prediction. It relates to the teams' past performances, but it doesn't address the specific matchup between Fonsica and the Cougars' best defensive player.

(B) Fonsica is the Panther's best defensive player.
This information does not weaken the coach's prediction either. The coach's argument is based on the absence of the Cougars' best defensive player, not Fonsica's defensive abilities.

(C) The Panthers' best defensive player will not be defending against the Cougars' highest scoring player.
This option weakens the coach's prediction because it introduces the possibility that even though the Cougars' best defensive player is absent, the Panthers' best defensive player (who is not mentioned in the coach's argument) might also be absent. If the Panthers' best defensive player is not present to defend against the Cougars' highest scoring player, it could significantly impact the outcome of the game.

(D) Fonsica is not the Panthers' best defensive player.
This information is irrelevant to the coach's argument. The coach's prediction is based on the absence of the Cougars' best defensive player, not the defensive skills of Fonsica or any other player on the Panthers' team.

(E) The Cougars' highest scoring player will not be defending against Fonsica.
This information is also irrelevant to the coach's argument. The coach's prediction is focused on the absence of the Cougars' best defensive player, not the defensive matchup between Fonsica and the Cougars' highest scoring player.

Based on the analysis above, option (C) weakens the coach's prediction the most by introducing the possibility that the Panthers' best defensive player will not be available to defend against the Cougars' highest scoring player.

The conclusion states that sailboats manufactured before 1990 are more likely to have retained their original finish, polish, and detailing than those manufactured in 1990 or later, implying that sailboat manufacturers were more attentive to producing higher-quality, durable sailboats before 1990.

(A) The level of resources dedicated to the manufacturing process of sailboats is generally much higher than that for most other manufactured goods.
This answer choice doesn't directly address the argument about the quality of sailboats. It talks about the level of resources but doesn't provide any information about the attention to detail or the original finish and polish.

(B) Sailboats built after 1990 are generally larger, spend more time at sea, and accommodate more people per use than those built before 1990.
This answer choice does not address the claim about the original finish, polish, and detailing of sailboats. It focuses on the size, usage, and accommodation capacity, which is not relevant to the conclusion.

(C) The materials used by sailboat manufacturers before 1990 were not significantly different from those used after 1990.
This answer choice directly weakens the conclusion. If the materials used before and after 1990 were not significantly different, it suggests that the quality of sailboats may not have been affected by the change in manufacturing dates. It suggests that factors other than material differences could be responsible for the observed difference in the retained finish, polish, and detailing.

(D) The average time to manufacture a sailboat has declined significantly since 1990.
This answer choice doesn't provide any information about the quality of sailboats. Even if the time to manufacture sailboats has declined, it doesn't necessarily indicate a decrease in attention to detail or a change in the quality of the finished product.

(E) Re-finishing, polishing, and detailing a sailboat is very costly, leading many owners to trade in their sailboats for a replacement or buy a new one as opposed to repairing the original.
This answer choice also weakens the conclusion. If re-finishing, polishing, and detailing are costly, it provides an alternative explanation for why sailboats manufactured after 1990 may not have retained their original finish, polish, and detailing. Owners may choose to trade them in or buy new ones instead of investing in repairs.

Therefore, the correct answer is (C) because it directly challenges the argument by stating that the materials used before and after 1990 were not significantly different.

The question is asking which of the answer choices argues most strongly against the effectiveness of the suggestion to impose fines on parents who arrive more than 10 minutes late to pick up their children from the daycare.

(A) By replacing social norms with market norms, fines might induce parents to weigh the "costs" of picking their children up late and, as a result, frequently choose to be late.

This answer choice suggests that by introducing fines, the daycare would shift the behavior from a social norm (picking up children on time out of a sense of responsibility) to a market norm (weighing the financial cost of being late). This change in perspective might actually lead parents to calculate the cost of being late and choose to be late more frequently, therefore undermining the effectiveness of the suggested fine.

(B) There might be irreconcilable disagreements among the daycare staff about whether the late fines should be imposed.

This answer choice focuses on potential disagreements among the daycare staff about implementing the late fines. While it implies a potential obstacle to implementing the policy, it does not directly argue against the effectiveness of the fines themselves.

(C) Late fines might cause some parents to enroll their children in other daycares.

This answer choice suggests that imposing late fines might lead some parents to withdraw their children from the daycare and enroll them elsewhere. While this could have an impact on the daycare, it does not directly argue against the effectiveness of the fines in incentivizing parents to pick up their children on time.

(D) Removing the late fine policy might actually increase the number of tardy pick-ups.

This answer choice presents the idea that removing the late fine policy could lead to an increase in the number of tardy pick-ups. While it implies that the fines might be effective, it does not directly argue against their effectiveness.

(E) Some parents might pick up their children late no matter what level of fine is imposed against them.

This answer choice suggests that some parents may continue to pick up their children late, regardless of the fine imposed on them. While it acknowledges that fines may not deter all parents from being late, it does not directly argue against the effectiveness of the fines as an incentive for other parents to be on time.

After evaluating each answer choice, it becomes clear that answer choice (A) provides the strongest argument against the effectiveness of the suggested fine. It highlights the potential negative impact of replacing social norms with market norms, where parents may start weighing the financial costs and choosing to be late more frequently. This undermines the effectiveness of the fines as an incentive to pick up children on time.

Therefore, the correct answer is (A).