easy · GMAT Verbal
When a GMAT argument presents a correlation between two events, it often assumes a causal relationship. For example, if a study finds that productivity increases when employees eat lunch away from their desks, the author may conclude that leaving the desk *causes* the increase. A strong Critical Reasoning student will identify this as a logical gap and look for alternative explanations.
Which of the following best describes the 'logical gap' the passage refers to?
- The unwavering certainty that eating a meal away from one's own desk can never improve workplace productivity at all
- Treating a mere correlation between two events as proof that one event produced the other.
- The author's repeated failure to disclose the exact prices the employees paid for their lunches each day
- The sheer impossibility of measuring employee productivity in a workplace with any reliable accuracy
- The literal physical distance separating an employee's desk from the company cafeteria
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More GMAT Verbal practice
- What logical role do the first two statements play?
- Which of the following is the conclusion?
- A gardener says: 'All roses in this garden require daily wat… — What is the role of the st
- What is the conclusion?
- What is the conclusion?
- What logical role does the first sentence play in the researcher's argument?
- What is the conclusion?
- Which of the following, if true, most undermines the agency's claim?