Psychologist: In an experiment, volunteers were asked to solve abstract arithmetic problems while their brains were being scanned. The brain...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
Psychologist: In an experiment, volunteers were asked to solve abstract arithmetic problems while their brains were being scanned. The brain scans revealed considerable activity in the linguistic-processing centers of the brain. However, it is likely that this activity reflected passing thoughts that are not an indispensable part of arithmetical reasoning processes.
Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest justification for the psychologist's judgment?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| In an experiment, volunteers were asked to solve abstract arithmetic problems while their brains were being scanned. |
|
| The brain scans revealed considerable activity in the linguistic-processing centers of the brain. |
|
| However, it is likely that this activity reflected passing thoughts that are not an indispensable part of arithmetical reasoning processes. |
|
Argument Flow:
The passage starts with experimental evidence (brain scans showing language activity during math), then presents the psychologist's alternative interpretation of this evidence
Main Conclusion:
The language center activity during arithmetic was likely just passing thoughts, not essential to the math reasoning process
Logical Structure:
The psychologist is making a claim that goes against the surface-level interpretation of the data. The evidence shows language activity during math, but the psychologist argues this doesn't mean language is necessary for math - it could just be unrelated mental chatter
Prethinking:
Question type:
Strengthen - We need to find information that makes the psychologist's conclusion more believable. The psychologist claims that the linguistic brain activity during math problems was just random passing thoughts, not essential for doing arithmetic.
Precision of Claims
The key claim is about the nature of linguistic activity during math - specifically that it's 'not an indispensable part of arithmetical reasoning processes.' We need to be precise about what makes linguistic processing essential vs. incidental.
Strategy
To strengthen the psychologist's view, we need evidence that linguistic processing isn't necessary for arithmetic reasoning. We can do this by:
- Showing people can do math fine without using language centers,
- Showing the linguistic activity correlates with irrelevant mental processes, or
- Demonstrating that when linguistic processing is impaired, math ability remains intact.
This actually weakens the psychologist's argument rather than strengthening it. If volunteers who reported using language were the most efficient at solving problems, this suggests that linguistic processing might actually be helpful or even essential for arithmetic reasoning, which contradicts the psychologist's claim that such activity represents merely passing thoughts.
The fact that other brain areas were also active doesn't tell us anything about whether linguistic processing is essential or not. Multiple brain areas can be active during complex tasks, but this doesn't help us determine if any particular area (like the linguistic centers) is indispensable for arithmetic reasoning.
While this shows that linguistic brain activity occurs during various mental tasks, it doesn't help distinguish between essential and non-essential linguistic processing. The psychologist needs evidence specifically about arithmetic reasoning, not just general information about when linguistic centers activate.
Although this suggests that severe head injuries don't always eliminate arithmetic ability, we don't know if the linguistic processing centers were specifically damaged in these cases. Without knowing which brain areas were affected, this doesn't provide clear evidence about whether linguistic processing is essential for arithmetic.
This provides the strongest support for the psychologist's position. Professional mathematicians solving the same arithmetic problems without significant linguistic brain activity demonstrates that such processing isn't indispensable for arithmetic reasoning. If linguistic activity were truly essential, we would expect all competent problem-solvers to show it, especially experts. The fact that some mathematicians solved problems without this activity strongly suggests the psychologist is correct that linguistic processing represents passing thoughts rather than essential reasoning components.