Machine operators are often responsible for repair of their machines. The more dependable a machine is, however, the less dependable...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
Machine operators are often responsible for repair of their machines. The more dependable a machine is, however, the less dependable is its human operator's performance in repairing occasional malfunctions of the machine, since
Which of the following most logically completes the passage ?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| Machine operators are often responsible for repair of their machines. |
|
| The more dependable a machine is, however, the less dependable is its human operator's performance in repairing occasional malfunctions of the machine, since |
|
Argument Flow:
The passage starts with a basic fact about machine operators handling repairs, then presents a counterintuitive relationship between machine reliability and operator repair skills. The word 'since' tells us we're about to get the reasoning behind this surprising claim.
Main Conclusion:
More dependable machines lead to less dependable operator repair performance
Logical Structure:
This is an incomplete argument waiting for its key premise. We have the conclusion (reliable machines create unreliable operators) but we need the 'since' clause to explain WHY this happens. The logical structure will be: [Missing reason] → Therefore, reliable machines make operators worse at repairs.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Logically Completes - We need to find a statement that provides the logical reasoning to explain why more dependable machines lead to less dependable operator repair performance.
Precision of Claims
The key claim involves a frequency relationship - the more dependable a machine is (breaks down less often), the less dependable the operator's repair performance becomes (gets worse at fixing problems).
Strategy
We need to find the missing logical link that explains this inverse relationship. The argument sets up that reliable machines somehow make operators worse at repairs. We need to think about what happens when machines rarely break down versus when they break down frequently. The explanation should focus on practice, experience, or familiarity with repair procedures.
as machines increasingly incorporate computerized components, the diagnosis and reconstruction of failed parts is being supplanted by the substitution of new parts in repairing the machines.
This choice discusses how computerized components change repair methods from diagnosis/reconstruction to part substitution. However, this doesn't explain WHY more dependable machines lead to less dependable operator performance. The shift from fixing to replacing parts doesn't address the relationship between machine reliability and operator skill degradation. This is about changing repair methods, not about why operator performance gets worse with more reliable machines.
the more complex a piece of machinery is, the more automatic control functions will be built into it, reducing the need for human monitoring.
This choice talks about complex machinery having more automatic controls, reducing human monitoring needs. But we're not discussing machine complexity or monitoring - we're trying to explain why reliable machines make operators worse at repairs. The reduction in monitoring doesn't logically connect to the decline in repair performance when malfunctions do occur.
as the dependability of machines increases, those operating the machines get less practice in handling malfunctions.
This choice perfectly explains the puzzle! When machines are more dependable, they break down less frequently, so operators get less practice handling malfunctions. This creates the logical chain: reliable machine → fewer breakdowns → less practice → rustier repair skills when problems do arise. This directly explains why more dependable machines lead to less dependable operator repair performance.
the less frequently a machine malfunctions, the more attention its operator will pay to its repair
This choice claims operators pay MORE attention to repairs when machines malfunction less frequently. This actually contradicts the argument's premise that operator performance gets WORSE with more reliable machines. If operators paid more attention, we'd expect better performance, not worse performance as stated in the passage.
in addition to repairing their machines after malfunction, machine operators are often responsible for regularly scheduled maintenance of their machines.
This choice mentions that operators handle both malfunction repairs and scheduled maintenance. However, this doesn't explain the inverse relationship between machine dependability and operator repair performance. Adding information about maintenance duties doesn't address why reliability makes operators worse at handling unexpected breakdowns.