Question

Difficulty: MediumCausal Flaws and Confounding Variables

Passage: An educational study evaluated high schools across several districts and observed that schools offering a mandatory financial literacy course had significantly higher average student savings account balances at graduation than schools without such a course. Based on this observation, the researchers concluded that mandatory financial literacy courses directly cause students to accumulate greater savings.

Statement: The researchers' conclusion is vulnerable to a confounding variable flaw if the schools offering the financial literacy course were located primarily in high-income communities where students received larger personal allowances.

Answer: Answer

Answer

The statement is True. High-income community status and higher personal allowances represent a confounding variable that provides an alternative causal explanation for the higher savings balances.
The statement is correct because introducing a systematic background difference—such as student allowance size driven by community wealth—creates an alternative explanation for why savings balances were higher. In GMAT Critical Reasoning, a causal argument is flawed if it assumes an observed correlation must mean one factor caused the other while ignoring plausible third-variable confounders.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the author's causal conclusion and evidence
Evidence: Schools with mandatory financial literacy courses have students with higher average savings. Conclusion: Financial literacy courses directly cause students to accumulate greater savings.
Understanding the premise-to-conclusion structure isolates the specific causal mechanism being claimed.
2
Evaluate the impact of the condition described in the statement
If course-offering schools are predominantly in affluent areas where students get larger allowances, those larger allowances could cause the higher savings regardless of the course.
A confounding variable is an external factor correlated with both the presumed cause and the effect that provides an alternative explanation for the observed outcome.
3
Assess whether the statement correctly characterizes this flaw
The statement correctly asserts that the argument is vulnerable to a confounding variable flaw under these conditions.
Failing to account for socioeconomic background invalidates the claim of direct causality from the course alone.

Key Concept

Causal Flaws and Confounding Variables
Rate this question