Test: Must Be True - GMAT MCQ

(A) Knowing how people behave allows one to infer what they value: This option suggests that by observing people's behavior, one can make inferences about their values. However, the argument in the statement takes the opposite approach, stating that knowing what people value can help predict their actions. Therefore, this option does not accurately express the conclusion of the argument.

(B) People's claims concerning what they value are symptomatic of their actions: This option implies that people's verbal statements or claims about their values are indicative of their actions. While this may be true in some cases, the argument in the statement focuses on the correlation between people's values and their actual behavior. It does not directly address the connection between claims and actions, so this option does not accurately express the conclusion of the argument.

(C) No two people who value different things act the same way in identical circumstances: This option highlights the idea that people with different values may behave differently even in identical situations. However, this statement is not the main conclusion of the argument presented. The argument focuses on the correlation between values and actions and how understanding people's values can predict their behavior.

(D) People who value wealth tend to allow their desire for it to outweigh other concerns: This option suggests that individuals who value wealth prioritize it over other considerations. While this statement may be true, it is not the main conclusion of the argument. The argument primarily emphasizes the correlation between values and actions and how knowing what people value can help predict their behavior.

(E) What people value can be a reliable indicator of how they will act: This option accurately expresses the conclusion of the argument. The argument states that there is a strong correlation between people's values and their actions. It further argues that knowing what people value can be used to predict their behavior. Therefore, this option captures the central idea and accurately represents the conclusion of the argument.

(A) At least one of the gift packages sent to Technocorp last week was not custom-made.

This statement cannot be determined from the given information. We know that at least two of the gift packages sent to Technocorp were custom-made, but we don't have any information about the remaining packages. It's possible that all seven packages were custom-made or that some were custom-made and some were not.

(B) At least one of the custom-made gift packages sent last week was not directed to Technocorp.

This statement cannot be determined from the given information. We know that at least two of the gift packages sent to Technocorp were custom-made, but we don't have any information about the other recipients. It's possible that all custom-made packages were sent to Technocorp.

(C) The majority of the gift packages sent to Technocorp last week were sent on Wednesday or later.

This statement cannot be determined from the given information. We know that all shipments sent on Wednesday or later consisted entirely of non-custom-made gift packages, but we don't have any information about the timing of the shipments to Technocorp.

(D) Some of the gift packages sent to Technocorp last week were sent on Tuesday or earlier.

This statement must be true. Since all shipments sent on Wednesday or later consisted entirely of non-custom-made gift packages, it means that the custom-made gift packages must have been sent on Tuesday or earlier.

(E) Technocorp received a higher proportion of the gift packages sent last week from Gift Catalogue Inc. than any other recipient.

This statement cannot be determined from the given information. We don't have any information about the number of gift packages sent to other recipients, so we cannot determine if Technocorp received a higher proportion or not.

Therefore, the only statement that must be true about Gift Catalogue Inc. is (D) Some of the gift packages sent to Technocorp last week were sent on Tuesday or earlier.

(A) Driving to the city is much faster than taking the train.
This statement is not necessarily true based on the claim. While it is mentioned that weekend commuters prefer driving their own cars for flexibility and time-savings, it doesn't explicitly state that driving is much faster than taking the train. The claim only suggests that commuters perceive driving as faster, but it may not be a factual comparison.

(B) Taking the train is not less expensive than driving a car.
The claim does not provide any information about the cost comparison between taking the train and driving a car. It states that weekend commuters prefer driving for flexibility and time-savings, but it doesn't mention anything about the cost. Therefore, this statement is not necessarily true based on the claim.

(C) There are plenty of parking spaces available in the city.
The claim does not provide any information about the availability of parking spaces in the city. It focuses on the preferences and perceived advantages of weekend commuters who choose to drive their own cars. Thus, the statement about the availability of parking spaces is not necessarily true based on the claim.

(D) All metropolitan residents who need to go to the city on weekends have a car at their disposal.
This statement must be true based on the claim. The claim assumes that weekend commuters prefer driving their own cars to the city. Therefore, it can be inferred that all metropolitan residents who need to go to the city on weekends have a car at their disposal.

(E) Commuting by train is quicker and more flexible during the work week.
The claim specifically focuses on the preferences and perceived advantages of weekend commuters who choose to drive their own cars. It doesn't provide any information about commuting by train during the work week. Therefore, this statement is not necessarily true based on the claim.

To summarize, based on the claim, only option (D) must be true, as it aligns with the assumption that all metropolitan residents who need to go to the city on weekends have a car at their disposal. The other statements (A, B, C, and E) are not necessarily true based on the information provided in the claim.

(A) The two products have many characteristics in common: This option highlights the fact that the products share numerous similarities in terms of their appearance, functionality, and features. It acknowledges the commonalities between the OCF Inc. and Ergotech workstations.

(B) ErgoTech must have copied the design of its new product from OCF’s design: This option suggests that ErgoTech deliberately copied the design of OCF Inc.'s product when developing their own workstation. It implies that ErgoTech may have engaged in plagiarism or intellectual property infringement.

(C) The similarities between the two products are not coincidental: This option asserts that the similarities between the two workstations are not merely a matter of chance. It implies that there may have been some level of collaboration, information sharing, or copying involved in the development of ErgoTech's product.

(D) Product designers sometimes reach the same solution to a given problem without consulting each other: This option suggests that product designers can independently arrive at the same solution when faced with a specific problem or design challenge. It implies that the similarities between the two workstations are coincidental and can be attributed to designers coming up with similar ideas independently.

(E) New products that at first appear to be unique are sometimes simply variations of other products: This option posits that seemingly unique and innovative products are often derived from or inspired by existing products. It suggests that the OCF Inc. and ErgoTech workstations may be variations or iterations of a similar underlying concept or design.

Based on the information provided in the argument, option (C) is the most accurate and reasonable interpretation. The argument emphasizes that the similarities between the two products go beyond mere coincidence, indicating a potential non-coincidental relationship between the designs.

(A) Managers at HiCorp work under conditions that are more stressful than the conditions under which managers at most other companies work: This option suggests that the managers at HiCorp experience higher levels of stress compared to managers in other companies. However, the passage does not provide any information or comparison to support this conclusion. Therefore, it is not strongly supported by the statements given.

(B) Most of the employee bonuses given by HiCorp are given to managers: This option implies that a significant portion of the bonuses at HiCorp is awarded to managers. The passage states that regular bonuses are given only to employees who work more than 40 hours per week, but it does not specify if these employees exclusively refer to managers. Without further information about the employee distribution and bonus allocation, it is difficult to determine if this conclusion is strongly supported.

(C) At HiCorp, insomnia is more widespread among managers than among any other group of employees: This option suggests that managers at HiCorp have a higher prevalence of insomnia compared to other groups of employees within the company. However, the passage does not provide any specific information about the occurrence of insomnia among other employee groups. Without such information, it is not possible to conclude that insomnia is more widespread among managers compared to other employees.

(D) No manager at HiCorp who works only 40 hours per week suffers from overwork: This option implies that managers who work 40 hours per week at HiCorp do not experience overwork. However, the passage does not explicitly state that managers who work only 40 hours per week do not suffer from overwork. It only mentions that a majority of managers work well over 60 hours per week, implying that they may be at risk of overwork. Therefore, this conclusion is not strongly supported.

(E) Most of the managers at HiCorp who receive regular bonuses have insomnia: This option suggests that a significant proportion of managers at HiCorp who receive regular bonuses also have insomnia. This conclusion is strongly supported by the passage, as it states that any combination of overwork and stress inevitably leads to insomnia. Since a majority of managers work well over 60 hours per week and are subject to stress, it is reasonable to conclude that many of them may experience insomnia. Thus, option (E) is the most strongly supported conclusion based on the information provided.

Based on the available information, option (E) is the most strongly supported conclusion.

(A) Most people who visit a doctor are already aware as to which drug the doctor will most likely prescribe to them: This option assumes that people already have knowledge of the specific drug their doctor will prescribe. However, the statement does not provide any information about people's awareness of the drugs their doctors may prescribe. Therefore, this option cannot be concluded.

(B) Television commercials for prescription drugs don't have an educational aspect to them in that they don't educate the consumers about the use of various drugs: The statement does not explicitly address whether television commercials for prescription drugs have an educational aspect. It focuses on the potential negative impact of commercials by suggesting they create preconceived notions and may lead people to request drugs without full awareness of the side effects. Hence, this option cannot be determined based on the statement.

(C) Pharmaceutical companies try to sell harmful drugs to consumers by using deceptive advertising: The statement does not mention whether pharmaceutical companies are intentionally selling harmful drugs through deceptive advertising. It primarily suggests that commercials may create preconceived notions and lead to patients requesting drugs without full awareness of the side effects. Therefore, this option goes beyond the scope of the statement.

(D) At least some people ask doctors to recommend to them medicines whose advertisement they have seen on television: This option aligns with the statement's assertion that commercials make people ask their doctors for drugs they have seen advertised. While the statement does not provide specific data on the prevalence of such behavior, it implies that it occurs to some extent. Thus, this option can be considered a possible conclusion.

(E) At times, doctors themselves use the advertisements for prescription drugs as a source of information to recommend medicines to their patients: The statement does not mention whether doctors use advertisements as a source of information to recommend medicines to their patients. It focuses on the potential negative impact of commercials on patients' requests for specific drugs. Therefore, this option cannot be determined based on the statement.

Based on the information provided, the only conclusion that can be considered necessary is (D) At least some people ask doctors to recommend medicines whose advertisement they have seen on television.

The passage states that if the city council institutes new parking regulations, there will be an increase in parking violations, and this increase in violations will result in a greater number of parking fines collected. It implies a cause-and-effect relationship between the new regulations, increased violations, and increased revenue.

Option (A) cannot be concluded because the passage does not state that an increase in parking violations is the only way for city revenues to increase. Other factors could potentially contribute to revenue growth.

Option (B) is not supported by the passage. It does not mention anything about the city council falling from favor with the citizens if they institute new parking regulations.

Option (C) cannot be definitively concluded from the passage. While the passage suggests a relationship between parking regulations and increased revenue, it does not explicitly state that the city council will only implement regulations if an increase in revenue is expected.

Option (D) aligns with the information provided. The passage explicitly states that if the new regulations result in more parking violators being ticketed, city revenues will increase. This conclusion follows the cause-and-effect relationship presented in the passage.

Option (E) is not supported by the passage. It mentions a complex system of parking regulations but does not provide any evidence or information about the relationship between the complexity of the regulations and the expected increase in traffic violations.

Therefore, the only conclusion that can be considered strongly supported by the information in the passage is (D) If the city council's new regulations cause more parking violators to be ticketed, the city revenues will increase.

(C) The suggestion that the fish living around coral reefs exhibit bright colors because they are camouflaged by the reefs is mistaken.

The marine biologist discusses the phenomenon of brilliantly colored fish living around coral reefs and the suggestion that these colors are a form of camouflage provided by the colorful reefs. The biologist argues against this suggestion by providing evidence that a reef stripped of its fish is relatively monochromatic, primarily composed of dull browns and greens. This evidence contradicts the notion that the bright colors of the fish are a result of camouflage provided by the reefs.

Option (A) presents one hypothesis about why fish near coral reefs exhibit bright colors, but it does not capture the main conclusion of the argument.

Option (B) mentions the use of camouflage by many species but does not directly address the main conclusion regarding the suggestion about the fish's bright colors.

Option (C) accurately captures the main conclusion by stating that the suggestion that the fish's bright colors are a result of camouflage provided by the reefs is mistaken. This aligns with the biologist's argument and evidence presented.

Option (D) discusses the appearance of a reef stripped of its fish, which supports the biologist's argument but does not capture the main conclusion.

Option (E) presents information about the colors of corals in a coral reef, which is mentioned in the biologist's argument but does not explicitly capture the main conclusion.

Therefore, the most accurate expression of the main conclusion drawn in the marine biologist's argument is (C) The suggestion that the fish living around coral reefs exhibit bright colors because they are camouflaged by the reefs is mistaken.

(E) Neither John nor Teresa is an accomplished tennis player.

The passage states that everyone sitting in the waiting room of the school's athletic office at nine o'clock had just registered for a beginners tennis clinic. It also mentions that no accomplished tennis player would register for a beginners tennis clinic.

From this information, we can conclude that John, Mary, and Teresa, who were sitting in the waiting room at that time, must have registered for a beginners tennis clinic. Since no accomplished tennis player would register for such a clinic, we can infer that John and Teresa are not accomplished tennis players.

Option (A) cannot be concluded because the passage does not provide enough information to determine whether any of the people sitting in the athletic office had ever played tennis before.

Option (B) is not necessarily true because the passage only mentions that everyone in the waiting room had registered for a beginners tennis clinic, but it does not exclude the possibility of them registering for other clinics as well.

Option (C) cannot be determined from the given information. The passage does not state that John, Mary, and Teresa were the only people who registered for a beginners tennis clinic. There could be others who registered as well.

Option (D) cannot be concluded because the passage does not provide information about the total number of people sitting in the waiting room. It only mentions John, Mary, and Teresa.

Option (E) aligns with the information provided. Since no accomplished tennis player would register for a beginners tennis clinic, we can infer that neither John nor Teresa, who were sitting in the waiting room, are accomplished tennis players.

Therefore, the most accurate conclusion that can be drawn from the given information is (E) Neither John nor Teresa is an accomplished tennis player.

(D) A curriculum of rigorous study does not adequately address the developmental needs of primary school students.

The parent argues against pushing very young children into rigorous study, stating that it does more harm than good and that curricula for these young students should address their special developmental needs. The parent also mentions that rigorous work in secondary school makes sense but not in the early years of primary school, as it may cause burnout.

From these statements, we can infer that the parent believes a curriculum of rigorous study is not suitable for primary school students. The emphasis is on the inadequacy of such an approach in addressing the developmental needs of young children.

Option (A) cannot be inferred because the parent's statements focus on the early years of primary school, not secondary school.

Option (B) is not mentioned in the parent's statements. The focus is on the developmental needs of young children, not secondary school students.

Option (C) is not directly addressed in the parent's statements. While the parent argues for addressing the developmental needs of all students, it does not explicitly state that the competitiveness of the country depends on meeting those needs.

Option (D) aligns with the parent's statements. The parent argues against a rigorous curriculum in the early years of primary school, suggesting that it does not adequately address the developmental needs of young children.

Option (E) cannot be inferred from the parent's statements. The focus is on the potential harm of rigorous study in the early years of primary school, but the economic competitiveness of the nation is not explicitly linked to it.

Therefore, the most accurate inference that can be drawn from the parent's statements is (D) A curriculum of rigorous study does not adequately address the developmental needs of primary school students.