* CONFUSING CR: One of the biggest threats to a company’s

[direstraits007]

One of the biggest threats to a company’s productivity is absenteeism. Studies have shown that companies with in-house childcare programs see fewer absences among their employees who are parents than companies without such programs.
Therefore, many companies could boost their productivity by starting in-house childcare programs.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the above argument?
A. Companies that reimburse outside child-care programs actually see less
absenteeism among working parents than companies with in-house programs.
B. In-house child-care programs create distractions for nonparents that can harm
their productivity.
C. Absenteeism is not a serious problem for companies that impose harsh penalties
on employees who miss work.
D. Studies have shown that employees with children are more likely than those
without children to remain in the same job for more than five years.
E. Potential employees generally view companies with in-house child-care
programs as more desirable places to work than companies without such programs.

[Confused between A and B]

I marked A because in the argument, the conclusion "many companies could boost their productivity by starting in-house childcare programs." is based on the very assumption that the in-house programs will reduce absenteeism of the company employees who are parents.

So this means that by saving time of parent employees from absenteeism, companies can boost their productivity. But what if despite the in-house program, parent employees of the company be more absent and increase the absenteeism ? that's what option A says.

I agree B also weakens it but since from the given argument we don't know anything about non-parent employees so A would be more weakening the argument rather than B.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.


Thanks !


GeeMate.

[rags99]

Is B the correct answer?

my reasoning for B:

The conclusion: in-house day care ---> better productivity ( C--> E)

What B does is: in-house day care ---> decreases productivity

This is a simple cause and effect problem.

The problem with A is:

A introduces additional information. Manhattan verbal review says for a weakening question, info given in the stimulus is all we have to work with.

A -- introduces outside day care..which is not part of the stimulus, thus A is irrelevant.

[direstraits007]

Is B the correct answer?

my reasoning for B:

The conclusion: in-house day care ---> better productivity ( C--> E)

What B does is: in-house day care ---> decreases productivity

This is a simple cause and effect problem.

The problem with A is:

A introduces additional information. Manhattan verbal review says for a weakening question, info given in the stimulus is all we have to work with.

A -- introduces outside day care..which is not part of the stimulus, thus A is irrelevant.

OA:B
Well then If I go by your logic "for a weakening question, info given in the stimulus is all we have to work with" then I think B is also wrong because nothing has been stated in the argument about the nonparents who are working.
Dude I agree that A has some outside information "introduces outside day care" but B also has the same "nonparents". Right ?

But I got it now. Both A and B weaken the argument but B is stronger and so is the answer.

Thanks!

GeeMate.

[Ben Ku]

Please cite the source (author) of this problem. We cannot reply unless a source is cited (and, if no source is cited, we will have to delete the post!). Thanks.