[問題]OG 157

邏輯思維的訓練,考試戰場上的對決

版主: shpassion, Traver0818

[問題]OG 157

文章fender » 2006-08-17 17:22

157. Companies O and P each have the same number of employees who work the same number of hours per week. According to records maintained by each company, the employees of Company O had fewer job-related accidents last year than did the employees of Company P. Therefore, employees of Company O are less likely to have job-related accidents than are employees of Company P.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?
(A) The employees of Company P lost more time at work due to job-related accidents than did the employees of Company O.
(B) Company P considered more types of accidents to be job-related than did Company O.
(C) The employees of Company P were sick more often than were the employees of Company O.
(D) Several employees of Company O each had more than one job-related accident.
(E) The majority of job-related accidents at Company O involved a single machine.







答案是(B)我沒問題
可是OG解答說D和E有support,我實在看不出來
我看過傷咖和CD發現大家都沒有在討論這一題
一定是我讀到暈頭了
所以才連這麼簡單的題目都想不透
可否請大牛們指點一下
謝謝
fender
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 61
註冊時間: 2005-07-15 01:42

Re: [問題]OG 157

文章j507242000 » 2014-09-30 11:59

不知道是不是對的,但我的理解是這樣:

題目的conclusion明顯是Therefore, employees of Company O are less likely to have job-related accidents than are employees of Company P.

A) lost more time at work與題目的conclusion無關,刪除
B) 因為計算job-related accidents的標準不同,所以公司的測量結果無法進行平等的比較,這樣題目的conclusion就無法成立,weaken
C) 雖然我覺得容易生病並不代表容易出事,但C選項成立的話也是Strengthen conclusion,刪除
D) 選項的Several employees是模糊字眼,無法得知several是多少,也不知道P公司與O公司的員工人數多寡,所以無法weaken conclusion,刪除
E) O公司的主要job-related accidents與題目的conclusion無關,刪除

歡迎討論
j507242000
初級會員
初級會員
 
文章: 22
註冊時間: 2014-03-14 20:09


回到 GMAT Critical Reasoning 考區

誰在線上

正在瀏覽這個版面的使用者:沒有註冊會員 和 11 位訪客

cron