Real estate agent: Some Web sites offer automatic appraisals of the market value of almost any home, based on the...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
Real estate agent: Some Web sites offer automatic appraisals of the market value of almost any home, based on the recent selling prices of other homes nearby. But a real estate agent familiar with a home and its neighborhood can assess the home's true market value far more accurately than any automated Web site can. Unlike the Web sites, a real estate agent can take into account a home's intangible aesthetic factors, such as views and interior design.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the real estate agent's argument?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Some Web sites offer automatic appraisals of the market value of almost any home, based on the recent selling prices of other homes nearby. |
|
| But a real estate agent familiar with a home and its neighborhood can assess the home's true market value far more accurately than any automated Web site can. |
|
| Unlike the Web sites, a real estate agent can take into account a home's intangible aesthetic factors, such as views and interior design. |
|
Argument Flow:
The argument starts by acknowledging that automated websites exist for home appraisals, then immediately challenges this with the claim that real estate agents are more accurate, and finally supports this claim by explaining that agents can consider aesthetic factors that websites cannot.
Main Conclusion:
Real estate agents can assess home values far more accurately than automated websites can.
Logical Structure:
The reasoning follows a simple structure: Agents are better than websites because agents can consider intangible aesthetic factors (like views and interior design) while websites cannot. This creates a gap in what websites can evaluate, making agents more comprehensive and therefore more accurate.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Strengthen - We need to find new information that would make us more confident that real estate agents can assess home values more accurately than automated websites, specifically because agents can consider intangible aesthetic factors.
Precision of Claims
The argument makes a quality claim about accuracy ('far more accurately') and identifies a specific capability difference (agents can assess 'intangible aesthetic factors' like views and interior design while websites cannot).
Strategy
To strengthen this argument, we want new information that either: (1) shows that intangible aesthetic factors have a significant impact on actual market value, (2) demonstrates that websites' reliance on nearby sales data leads to systematic errors, or (3) provides evidence that agents' consideration of aesthetic factors actually translates to more accurate valuations in practice.
This directly strengthens the argument by showing that within the real estate profession itself, agents who consider intangible aesthetic factors are far more accurate than those who don't. This creates powerful support for the main claim because it demonstrates that the specific capability the agent highlights (considering aesthetic factors) actually translates to significantly better accuracy in practice. If aesthetic factors make such a difference among agents, then agents who can consider them should indeed be more accurate than websites that cannot.
This tells us that most agents consider some aesthetic factors, but this doesn't help strengthen the argument about accuracy. We already know from the passage that agents can consider these factors - the question is whether doing so makes them more accurate than websites. This choice doesn't provide any evidence about improved accuracy, so it doesn't strengthen the claim.
This actually weakens the agent's argument by suggesting that websites can account for many intangible factors through a home's sales history. If websites can capture these factors automatically, then the agent's key advantage (being able to consider what websites cannot) becomes much less significant, undermining the accuracy claim.
This focuses on the seller's financial interest in accurate appraisals, but doesn't provide any evidence about whether agents are actually more accurate than websites. The motivation for accuracy doesn't tell us anything about the comparative accuracy of different appraisal methods, so this is irrelevant to strengthening the agent's claim.
This suggests that neighborhood-wide aesthetic factors are already reflected in the recent sales prices that websites use. If true, this would mean websites are already capturing important aesthetic information through their data, which would weaken rather than strengthen the agent's argument that websites miss crucial aesthetic factors.