Don’t lose your progress!

We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.

Up to 90+ points GMAT score improvement guarantee

The best guarantee you’ll find

Our Premium and Ultimate plans guarantee up to 90+ points score increase or your money back.

Master each section of the test

Comprehensive GMAT prep

We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.

Schedule-free studying

Learn on the go

Study whenever and wherever you want with our iOS and Android mobile apps.

The most effective way to study

Personalized GMAT prep, just for you!

Adaptive learning technology focuses on your academic weaknesses.

Critical Reasoning: Boldface Type Questions

In a recent experiment, scientists constructed an environment with certain conditions that would contribute to excessive stress levels in lab rats. The rats were separated into two groups before being subjected to the stressful environment. One group was treated with linaloyl oxide through natural respiration while the other was not. Although it has been believed for centuries by certain medicinal researchers that the plant-based alcohol could be effective as an anxiety reducer, the broader medical community has remained skeptical. This skepticism will clearly change since the published results of the experiment reveal that there was an undeniable link between the administered substance and the moderate and controlled status of the treated rats' neutrophil granulocytes, a central component of the immune system indicative of stress, despite the manipulated, stress-inducing environment.

In the argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?



Although this answer choice's first definition is right, its second is not. The phrase exposes the refutability basically means undermines, i.e., it means the second boldface portion undermines the conclusion. However, the second boldface portion completely agrees with the argument's position since it directly supports it.



The second boldface portion does not develop the concept, but rather provides evidence that the concept is true. Also, describing the first boldface as questionable goes too far - the concept is questioned (i.e. under examination), but questionable is taken in this context as "probably wrong", and that goes against the argument's position.



While this answer choice correctly defines the first boldface portion, it is incorrect regarding the definition of the second. The second boldface portion validates the relationship described in the first rather than calls it into question.



The first boldface portion cannot be referred to as evidence since it is worded as an old belief, that had not been verified objectively. You can immediately eliminate answer choices that incorrectly define the first boldface part; do not waste time reading the rest.



The first boldface portion cites an old belief which has not been proven, only speculated; the second validates this speculation with scientific findings.

The first is a theory that is in accordance with the argument's main position; the second is evidence that exposes the refutability of the defence of that position.
The first is a speculative statement based on reasoning; the second is an elaboration of certain findings recorded as evidence that agrees with that speculation.
The first is a questionable concept; the second develops that concept, forming a more comprehensive hypothesis.
The first is an untested proposal of a causal relationship that the argument favors; the second calls that relationship into question.
The first is historical evidence leading to the basis of the argument's position; the second is proof of that position