扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / OG2017V-CR-180
In an experiment, volunteers walked individually through a dark, abandoned theater. Half of the volunteers had been told that the theater was haunted and the other half that it was under renovation. The first half reported significantly more unusual experiences than the second did. The researchers concluded that reports of encounters with ghosts and other supernatural entities generally result from prior expectations of such experiences.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the researchers' reasoning?
None of the volunteers in the second half believed that the unusual experiences they reported were supernatural.
All of the volunteers in the first half believed that the researchers' statement that the theater was haunted was a lie.
Before being told about the theater, the volunteers within each group varied considerably in their prior beliefs about supernatural experiences.
Each unusual experience reported by the volunteers had a cause that did not involve the supernatural.
The researchers did not believe that the theater was haunted.
选项D为什么错误，如果unusual experience不是超自然的事物，那么也无法得出结论吧？
我觉得ABC都有削弱的嫌疑，然而A说第二组的人认为 unusual experiences 怎样怎样，题里说的是第二组的 unusual experiences 少，没说他们对这个的看法，貌似无关，C 说的不如B 明确
相关因果推理
unusual 经历与expectation相关。。。。expectation导致unusual经历 削弱，给出unusual经历另一个原因，或切断因国关系
A 第二组的人都不相信经历是supernatural 。。本来第二组的人就没有expectation
B 第一组的人都相信expectation是假的。。那切断了关系，说明不是expectation导致
C 在。。之前 无关
D 无关
E 无关
个人感觉是果因推理的削弱：CQ2 因果可能没有联系。不信闹鬼，所以对such experiences没有prior expectation。
但是我又不能确切排除D...它的削弱没有明确指向prior expectation，那会不会是CQ1的他因呢？
被事先告诉有鬼的报告更多不正常经历，所以是预先告知导致不正常经历；
相关因果
第一组人不信有鬼的话但还是害怕了，所以断掉联系
希望毕老师能够赶紧完善verbal分册部分的逻辑题，有两三道题目看了解释也没完全搞清
好的。一定尽快。GMAT官方考题实在是太多了。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论