#10 - Decision makers tend to have distinctive styles. One

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Must Be True. The correct answer choice is (A)

This stimulus consists entirely of information, with no real conclusion, so a Must Be True question is often likely to follow. We learn that some decision-makers choose to get diverse input from advisors, and these decision-makers will often argue positions they do not necessarily support, just to see how their advisors react.

We can infer that it might be difficult to know exactly what some decision makers believe before they actually make a decision. We should stick to that clear inference and avoid making any unwarranted assumptions, and in fact most of the incorrect choices might happen given the stimulus, but do not have to occur.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. It is almost exactly what we would infer. Even without having drawn this inference, the behavior described in this choice is consistent with that of a decision maker who adopts positions he or she does not support. That is exactly what the stimulus described, and no more, making this an ideal choice.

Answer choice (B): The stimulus talks about these decision makers having "real reservations," and that is inconsistent with a person who does not know which ideas he or she believes in, so answer choice (B) is wrong.

Answer choice (C): Since it is quite possible that the decision makers described in the stimulus would never dismiss an idea out of hand, there is not much support for answer choice (C). Furthermore, the stimulus is about what people "tend" to do and what "often" occurs, so it seems somewhat likely that we cannot hold these decision makers to an absolute standard. Therefore "must be" is unjustified by the stimulus, and you should eliminate this answer.

Answer choice (D): To believe that the decision makers in the stimulus would be likely to end up deciding "in favor of ideas in which they do not believe," you would generally assume that their advisors do not usually agree with the decision maker‘s ultimate beliefs. However, since their advisors could generally agree, or the decision makers could ignore some advice, answer choice (D) is unsupported.

Answer choice (E): This answer is unsupported and might very well be false given the stimulus. If a decision maker depends on argument with the advisors, it might be detrimental if the advisor knows the argument is a sham, or could in some other way misrepresent whether the decision maker's "real reservations" are idiosyncratic (unique). You should eliminate this choice immediately.

[hanvan]

Hi, I am so confused on the question 19, page 1-80 ( power score course book). It is about the " decision makers" , I pick the D, but the right choice is A. Please explain why. Thanks so much!

[Nikki Siclunov]

We learn from the stimulus that some decision-makers choose to get diverse input from advisers, and these decision-makers will often argue positions they do not necessarily support, just to see how their advisers react. Think of it as playing "devil's advocate."

(A) is correct, because it is consistent with the above-mentioned description. The behavior described in this choice is consistent with that of a decision maker who argues positions he or she does not support: if you quote them accurately and at length, the content of the quote is likely to be at variance with (i.e. different from) the decision eventually made.

(D) is incorrect, because there is no reason to suspect that the decision-makers will actually decide in favor of ideas in which they do not believe. They merely argue these ideas in order to see how their advisers will react.

[hanvan]

We learn from the stimulus that some decision-makers choose to get diverse input from advisers, and these decision-makers will often argue positions they do not necessarily support, just to see how their advisers react. Think of it as playing "devil's advocate."
(A) is correct, because it is consistent with the above-mentioned description. The behavior described in this choice is consistent with that of a decision maker who argues positions he or she does not support: if you quote them accurately and at length, the content of the quote is likely to be at variance with (i.e. different from) the decision eventually made.

(D) is incorrect, because there is no reason to suspect that the decision-makers will actually decide in favor of ideas in which they do not believe. They merely argue these ideas in order to see how their advisers will react

Thanks so much

[ellenb]

Dear Powerscore,

I seem to be a bit confused as to why answer choice D is wrong?
I picked this choice originally, read the explanations, but I am still confused.
I thought this to be the right answer because they pick ideas that they do not believe.

Thanks in advance,

Ellen

[Jon Denning]

Hey Ellen - the key here is really understanding the situation in the stimulus. Basically what we're told is that before making a decision on a certain subject, sometimes decision makers will argue for the thing they disagree with (essentially play devil's advocate) in order to see if other people will agree with the questionable choice, or if they'll argue/disagree with it like the decision maker does.

It would be like if I had to pick between ice cream and vegetables, and whatever I choose is what all my friends get too. Obviously I want ice cream, as does the group, but just to be 100% sure I start talking about how vegetables is clearly the better choice, and how much healthier we'll all be, and they taste better than ice cream...if the rest of the group starts arguing against me and vegetables, even after I make a case for vegetables, then I can feel even more confident that ice cream really is the way to go, which is what I intended all along.

But that's not what D says. D says decision makers actually PICK the thing they didn't like (the thing they deceptively argued for to gauge other peoples' opinions). But that never happens in the stimulus. They don't actually decide to do the thing they don't believe in; they simply act like they like it to see what others think, and then can feel more confident choosing the thing they believed in to begin with. They may argue for the vegetables to see how people truly feel, but they don't PICK vegetables. They just feel more justified deciding on ice cream.

Make sense?

[ellenb]

Thanks,

I seem a bit confused, because I think of:

The word "proceed" in this context to mean, "act"

So, I think it to be true that decision makers act in a way that they will choose something that they do not agree with personally. For example, based on your example, they act as if they would like vegetables, however, they end up picking ice cream.

I know my thought process is wrong somewhere I just want to clarify it.

thanks a lot in advance!

Ellen

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hi Ellen,

Let me jump in here and add to Jon's excellent analogy. Yes, indeed, they proceed (or act) as if they would pick vegetables. The key, however, is that they end up picking ice cream! By contrast, answer choice (D) implies that they will actually decide to pick vegetables instead of ice cream (frequently, in fact). That never happens.

I think the issue here is one of wording. For answer choice (D) to work, it has be stated as follows:

Certain decision makers proceed in a way that makes it seem likely that they will frequently decide in favor of ideas in which they do not believe.

Because the word "seem" is missing from that sentence, it implies that the actual outcome is consistent with how they acted. It is not.

Does this help a bit?

[ellenb]

So basically D says that:

They argue against it and they end up picking it. (we defiantly know what they pick)

Vs.


They argue against it and they seem like they will end up picking it; however, there is no definite answer we do no know what they end up picking.

Is might thought process correct? I want to make sure I see it.

Thanks

Ellen

[Nikki Siclunov]

No, they key is to understand that they argue against, or act in a way contrary to, what they end up deciding. They make it seem likely that they will pick vegetables; however, they ultimately decide on the ice cream. The problem with (D) is the implication that their ultimate decision is consistent with their actions/arguments. It is not.