This year, each film submitted to the Barbizon Film Festival was submitted in one of ten categories. For each category,...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Paradox

HARD

...

Notes

Post a Query

This year, each film submitted to the Barbizon Film Festival was submitted in one of ten categories. For each category, there was a panel that decided which submitted films to accept. Fact I : Within each category, the rate of acceptance for domestic films was the same as that for foreign films. Fact II : The overall rate of acceptance of domestic films was significantly higher than that of foreign films.

In light of the background information, which of the following, if true can account for fact I and fact II both being true of the submissions to this year's Barbizon Film Festival?

In each category, the selection panel was composed of filmmakers , and some selection panels included no foreign filmmakers.

Significantly more domestic films than foreign films were submitted to the festival.

In each of the past three years, the overall acceptance rate was higher for foreign than for domestic films, an outcome that had upset some domestic filmmakers.

The number of films to be selected in each category was predetermined, but in no category was it required that the acceptance rate of foreign films should equal that of domestic films.

Most foreign films, unlike most domestic films, were submitted in categories with high prestige, but with correspondinly low rates of acceptance.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
This year, each film submitted to the Barbizon Film Festival was submitted in one of ten categories.	What it says: The festival organized films into 10 separate categories What it does: Sets up the basic structure of how the festival works What it is: Background information
For each category, there was a panel that decided which submitted films to accept.	What it says: Each category had its own decision-making panel What it does: Builds on the category structure by explaining the review process What it is: Background information
Fact I: Within each category, the rate of acceptance for domestic films was the same as that for foreign films.	What it says: Domestic and foreign films had equal acceptance rates within any single category What it does: Presents the first key piece of evidence we need to explain What it is: Given fact Visualization: Category A: Domestic 30%, Foreign 30%; Category B: Domestic 50%, Foreign 50%
Fact II: The overall rate of acceptance of domestic films was significantly higher than that of foreign films.	What it says: When looking at all categories combined, domestic films got accepted much more than foreign films What it does: Creates an apparent contradiction with Fact I that needs resolution What it is: Given fact Visualization: Overall: Domestic 60%, Foreign 30% (despite equal rates within categories)

Argument Flow:

We're given background about a film festival with 10 categories and separate panels. Then we get two facts that seem to contradict each other - equal acceptance rates within categories but unequal overall rates.

Main Conclusion:

There is no main conclusion in this passage - it's presenting a paradox that needs explanation.

Logical Structure:

This is a paradox resolution question. We have two seemingly contradictory facts and need to find what could make both true simultaneously. The key is understanding how category-level equality can coexist with overall inequality.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Paradox - We need to find information that explains how two seemingly contradictory facts can both be true at the same time.

Precision of Claims

The claims involve specific rates and comparisons: equal acceptance rates within each category vs. significantly different overall rates between domestic and foreign films.

Strategy

For paradox questions, we need to find scenarios that make both facts perfectly compatible. The key is understanding how equal rates within categories can still lead to different overall rates. This typically happens when there are differences in distribution, volume, or composition across categories.

Answer Choices Explained

In each category, the selection panel was composed of filmmakers , and some selection panels included no foreign filmmakers.

This choice focuses on the composition of selection panels and whether they included foreign filmmakers. However, panel composition doesn't explain how we can have equal acceptance rates within categories but different overall rates. Even if panels had no foreign filmmakers, this wouldn't create the mathematical phenomenon we need to explain. The paradox is about statistical distribution, not panel bias.

Significantly more domestic films than foreign films were submitted to the festival.

This suggests that significantly more domestic films were submitted overall. However, this doesn't resolve our paradox at all. The number of submissions doesn't affect acceptance rates - rates are percentages, not raw numbers. Whether 100 or 1000 films are submitted doesn't change how equal within-category rates can lead to unequal overall rates.

In each of the past three years, the overall acceptance rate was higher for foreign than for domestic films, an outcome that had upset some domestic filmmakers.

This discusses past years' trends and domestic filmmakers being upset about previous outcomes. This historical information is completely irrelevant to explaining this year's statistical phenomenon. Past acceptance patterns don't help us understand how equal current within-category rates produce unequal overall rates.

The number of films to be selected in each category was predetermined, but in no category was it required that the acceptance rate of foreign films should equal that of domestic films.

This mentions predetermined selection numbers per category and notes that equal acceptance rates weren't required. While this explains that the equal rates weren't mandated, it doesn't explain how they occurred naturally while still producing different overall rates. This choice doesn't provide the mechanism that resolves the paradox.

Most foreign films, unlike most domestic films, were submitted in categories with high prestige, but with correspondinly low rates of acceptance.

This perfectly explains the paradox through distribution differences across categories. If foreign films were concentrated in high-prestige categories with low acceptance rates (say 10% for both domestic and foreign), while domestic films were mainly in categories with higher acceptance rates (say 50% for both), then we get equal within-category rates but vastly different overall rates. This is a classic example of Simpson's Paradox, where subgroup equality coexists with overall inequality due to distribution patterns.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...