Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorEvaluating Causal Arguments and Alternative Explanations

A technology company recently introduced an asynchronous communication policy, replacing mandatory daily team meetings with written status updates. Over the subsequent twelve months, the average time required for the software development team to complete project features decreased by 35 percent. The director of operations concluded that eliminating daily meetings directly caused the reduction in feature completion time by minimizing workplace disruptions. Which of the following would be most useful to determine in evaluating the director of operations' conclusion?

  1. Whether the company implemented automated code-testing software during the same twelve-month period that significantly reduced deployment delays.Cevap
  2. B
    Whether the reduction in feature completion time directly caused software engineers to report higher overall job satisfaction.
  3. C
    Whether software developers at competing firms that retained mandatory daily meetings expressed a preference for written status updates.
  4. D
    Whether the asynchronous communication policy was applied to non-technical departments within the company in addition to the software development team.
  5. E
    Whether the director of operations had previously advocated for similar workplace policy changes at other software companies.

Cevap

Determining whether the company implemented automated code-testing software during the same twelve-month period that significantly reduced deployment delays is most useful in evaluating the conclusion.
The correct answer provides a critical test for an alternative explanation (confounding variable). In GMAT causal evaluation, an argument inferring causation from a temporal correlation can be evaluated by checking whether another major operational change occurred simultaneously. If automated testing software was introduced, that software could be the real reason completion times dropped, thereby weakening the director's claim. If no such software was introduced, that potential alternative cause is eliminated, strengthening the director's claim.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument structure.
Premise: Meeting elimination was followed by a 35% decrease in feature completion time. Conclusion: Eliminating meetings directly caused the reduction in completion time by eliminating disruptions.
Identifying the premise and conclusion clarifies that the argument relies on a correlation-to-causation leap.
2
Identify the primary logical vulnerability in causal reasoning.
The argument assumes no external confounding factors or alternative explanations caused the productivity increase during the twelve-month period.
Causal claims based on chronological sequence (post hoc reasoning) are highly vulnerable to third-variable confounders.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the Variance Test for causal evaluation.
If automated testing software was introduced (Yes), it offers an alternative cause for the faster completion times, weakening the conclusion. If no automated testing was introduced (No), an alternative cause is ruled out, strengthening the conclusion.
An option that yields opposite logical effects depending on a 'Yes' or 'No' answer is the correct evaluation factor.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Causal Arguments by Rule-Out or Identification of Alternative Explanations
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Evaluating Causal Arguments and Alternative Explanations

Bu konudan daha fazla soru