In an experiment, researchers posed simple questions in geometry to children from varied backgrounds. One group consisted of 7-to-13-year-old children...
GMAT Two Part Analysis : (TPA) Questions
In an experiment, researchers posed simple questions in geometry to children from varied backgrounds. One group consisted of 7-to-13-year-old children of the Mundurucu, an isolated indigenous group in the Amazon basin. The Mundurucu children, who had no formal training in geometry, answered the questions just as quickly and accurately as did French chidlren of the same ages who did have formal training in geometry. In contrast, 5-year-old North American children had much more trouble answering the questions. The researchers concluded that some basic geometric knowledge is innate, but this innate knowledge typically develops only after age 5.
In the table, select the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the researchers' conclusion and most weaken it, respectively. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Phase 1: Owning the Dataset
Argument Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| "researchers posed simple questions in geometry to children from varied backgrounds" |
|
| "7-to-13-year-old children of the Mundurucu, an isolated indigenous group...had no formal training in geometry" |
|
| "answered...just as quickly and accurately as did French children...who did have formal training" |
|
| "5-year-old North American children had much more trouble" |
|
| "some basic geometric knowledge is innate, but...typically develops only after age 5" |
|
Argument Structure
- Main conclusion: Basic geometric knowledge is innate but develops after age 5
- Supporting evidence:
- Mundurucu children (no training) = French children (training) at ages 7-13
- 5-year-old North Americans struggled
- Key assumption: Performance differences reflect innate development rather than cultural factors
- Logical flow: Equal performance despite different training → knowledge must be innate; younger children's struggles → age-dependent development
Phase 2: Question Analysis & Prethinking
Understanding What Each Part Asks
- Part 1 (Most strengthen): We need something that makes the researchers' conclusion MORE likely to be true
- Part 2 (Most weaken): We need something that makes the researchers' conclusion LESS likely to be true
- Relationship: These work in opposite directions - one supports the conclusion while the other undermines it
Prethinking for Strengtheners
To strengthen the conclusion that geometric knowledge is innate and develops after age 5, we'd want:
- Evidence that ALL 5-year-olds struggle (regardless of culture/training)
- Evidence that older children succeed without any cultural advantages
- Confirmation that the test conditions were fair across all groups
Prethinking for Weakeners
To weaken the conclusion, we'd want:
- Evidence that cultural factors DO matter for geometric understanding
- Evidence that some 5-year-olds can succeed (challenging the age threshold)
- Evidence that the Mundurucu had some other advantage explaining their performance
Phase 3: Answer Choice Evaluation
Evaluating Each Choice
Choice A: "North American children 7 to 13 years old had much more trouble answering the questions than did the Mundurucu of the same ages."
- This suggests cultural differences persist in older children
- For strengthening: Doesn't help - actually contradicts the innate knowledge claim
- For weakening: STRONG - shows that culture/training matters even after age 5
Choice B: "None of the 5-year-old North American children had ever studied any geometry."
- This clarifies their lack of training
- For strengthening: Minimal help - doesn't address why they struggled
- For weakening: Doesn't weaken - the conclusion is about innate knowledge anyway
Choice C: "Mundurucu children who were 5 years old had just as much trouble answering the questions as did the 5-year-old North American children."
- Shows ALL 5-year-olds struggle regardless of culture
- For strengthening: VERY STRONG - supports both the innate claim AND the age threshold
- For weakening: Doesn't weaken - actually supports the conclusion
Choice D: "The researchers posed the same questions to 5-year-old French and Mundurucu children as they posed to the 7-to-13-year-old children."
- Confirms test validity
- For strengthening: Moderate - ensures fair comparison but doesn't add new support
- For weakening: Doesn't weaken - just confirms methodology
Choice E: "Most of the children studied answered one or more of the questions incorrectly."
- General statement about error rates
- For strengthening: Doesn't help - too vague
- For weakening: Doesn't help - applies to all groups equally
The Correct Answers
- For Part 1 (Most strengthen): Choice C - It perfectly supports BOTH parts of the conclusion by showing that 5-year-olds universally struggle regardless of culture, confirming the innate nature and age threshold
- For Part 2 (Most weaken): Choice A - It directly undermines the innate knowledge claim by showing persistent cultural differences in the older age group
Common Traps to Highlight
- Choice B seems relevant for strengthening because it addresses training, but it doesn't actually add support since the conclusion already assumes knowledge is innate
- Choice D might seem important for strengthening by confirming methodology, but it's weaker than Choice C which provides actual supportive evidence
- Students might overlook how Choice A specifically targets the "innate" part of the conclusion by showing cultural factors matter