OG13 CR19 大牛求教！

francescjcj

A major network news organization experienced a drop in viewership in the week following the airing of a controversial report on the economy. The network also received a very large number of complaints regarding the report. The network, however, maintains that negative reactions to the report had nothing to do with its loss of viewers
　　Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the network’s position?
　　(A) The other major network news organizations reported similar reductions in viewership during the same week.
　　(B) The viewers who registered complaints with the network were regular viewers of the news organization’s programs.
　　(C) Major network news organizations publicly attribute drop in viewership to their own reports only when they receive complaints about those reports.
(D) This was not the first time that this network news organization has aired a controversial report on the economy that has inspired viewers to complain to the network.
(E) Most network news viewers rely on network news broadcasts as their primary source of information regarding the economy.
the answer is A .
为什么其他organization 发生的事情能说明自己家发生的事情？不是说不能这样类比的么？什么时候同类型的事情能类比 什么时候不能呢？

may526

B项解释：
我之前选择B的原因是，因为是常客所以不会因为小小的抱怨就放手。
且不论常客的容忍是有限度的，从头分析逻辑关系：
complain on reports —— viewership↓
媒体认为无关，问增强媒体，即削弱相关。
B 提出是常客抱怨，这一点其实是无关甚至增强相关的。因为相当于在complain on reports和viewership↓之间搭了个桥，给出了抱怨和收视率的中间：抱怨节目——常客抱怨——收视率下滑，其实是解释了相关关系。
所以b不太好。至少是不能判断常客在抱怨之后的选择(是否继续看节目)

再看A，给出了更为明确的技术考点：排他增强，我曾经想A会不会是大家都报道了这个reports，所以大家一起收视率下滑。但是是我想多了。题目没有给出一起报道的信息，疑罪从无。

Bensontuo

我假設妳題目是讀懂的

這種題目是套路中的小套路題, 其實非常簡單

題目暗示了因果, 在要某一個單位或是某人他因削弱, 然後要你支持這個單位或是人的它因削弱的立場.

Ａ看到馬上選, 他就是在說, 此結果發生的其他單位, 並無這樣的原因, 意思是, 這樣的結果必然有至少一個其他雲因發生的可能性。

KELLY117

zzx576122628 发表于 2014-8-20 21:16
用helr方法 相关因果模式，把两件同时发生的事加了因果关系，评估这个关系是否正确
前提：有一份报告（事件 ...

同意！               

贝西文迅

whnzh8 发表于 2013-7-12 22:00
为什么我选的是D，D说这不是该组织第一次做引起观众不满的报道，那是不是就意味着以前有相同情形但是没有发 ...

我之前也想问为什么不选D，后来又仔细看了下，原来D选项只说了因，至于因和果的关系，没有直接点出来，所以我们不确定到底是发生了流失率，还是没有。所以不选。

bessie_song

个人理解：A中的另一家organization可能报道了也可能没报道controversial report，因此有可能存在产生其他导致收视率下滑的原因
当然，如果A中加入了限定条件，说另一家没报道也经历了view视频下滑，则更严谨一些

visan_y

helr的cr笔记里有提到这种cr题型，是相关因果模式推理。以下为helr手打逻辑笔记。

apooolo

这是曼哈顿论坛上一个筒子的疑问，粗想有点疑点，但是看22和23楼回复，就比较清楚了。我开始选的B。

A major network news organization experienced a drop in viewership in the week following the airing of a controversial report on the economy. The network also received a very large number of complaints regarding the report. The network, however, maintains that negative reactions to the report had nothing to do with its loss of viewers.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the network's position?
A.The other major network news organizations reported similar reductions in viewership during the same week.
B.The viewers who registered complaints with the network were regular viewers of the news organization's programs.
C.Major network news organizations publicly attribute drops in viewership to their own reports only when they receive complaints about those reports.
D.This was not the first time that this network news organization has aired a controversial report on the economy that has inspired viewers to complain to the network.
E. Most network news viewers rely on network news broadcasts as their primary source of information regarding the economy.


i have a following question regarding option A : how can we assume in option A that "the other major network news organization" did not air the controversial report ? what if the same report was also aired by "other major networks"(i mean its not something unusual .it does happen that two news channel air the same report ) and that "the report " was a real reason behind the reduction of their viewers .i feel that option A is incomplete in its text .i do agree that in causal questions we have to show the specifics of cause and effect but here in option A we are just referring to the effect without even discussing the presence or absence of cause!!
i guess option A is making unwarranted assumptions
experts please help
PS :: the OA : is A .i am not questioning the OA .but whats bothering me is that option A is making the assumption that i have stated above and i have read in many post of Ron that the answers in strengthening and weakening questions sud stand of their own and sud not make any kind of assumption
Ron plz help me understand

zzx576122628

用helr方法 相关因果模式，把两件同时发生的事加了因果关系，评估这个关系是否正确
前提：有一份报告（事件一）收视率下降（事件二），观众对报告不满发来投诉
结论：是报告（因）导致了收视率下降（果）
问削弱（原来结论说的是无关问加强，我转了一下，觉得削弱比较顺手）

四个评估方向：因果是否无关，因果是否倒置，是否有因导致的中间因素进而导致果，是否有他因导致果
                        选项中要涉及“因”+“果”或只有“果”+“他因”，技巧上讲没提到果的或者没有对果有直接影响的都是无效选项
(A) The other major network news organizations reported similar reductions in viewership during the same week.
      整个行业收视率都不好，可以理解为某种因素使整个行业都不好，也包括他家的收视率，他因，正确选项
(B) The viewers who registered complaints with the network were regular viewers of the news organization’s programs.
     强调了“因”中的观众是忠实观众，那么这些人不爽了一定会导致收视率下降，反而是加强，相反选项
(C) Major network news organizations publicly attribute drop in viewership to their own reports only when they receive complaints about those reports.
     只有收到抱怨的时候才会归咎于报告的问题，和题干完全一样嘛，相反选项
(D) This was not the first time that this network news organization has aired a controversial report on the economy that has inspired viewers to complain to the network.
     没有涉及“果”，只涉及了因的两个属性，不在评估方向内，无效选项
(E) Most network news viewers rely on network news broadcasts as their primary source of information regarding the economy.
    没有涉及“果”无法评估，无效选项
     

GMATYedda

potentialwjy117 发表于 2014-6-17 09:17
我也选D
D不能说最好.
"这不是该新闻机构第一次因争议报导导致投诉"

我的个人见解是：
如果A为正确，也就是说所有news org都有相同的drops in viewership问题，加上前提 the network aired a controversial report on the economy （特殊的条件，别的org没有），就可以推出原因并非是这个report的问题。
总的来说，既然大家都有viewer的减少，那么为什么会是report的关系而减少的呢？因为原文中没有提及其他媒体是否有报道controversial report, 所以可以默认为只有这个network报道了


其它选项：
B的话，这句话是否可以解释viewer drop的原因？正是因为对report的complaints都是regular viewer发出的，所以viewers drop了？显然这句话似乎不太通顺； 那根据上面几位的分析，如果说regular viewer更容易留下来，那么为什么要提他们的complaints，而不是表达viewer的loyalty？显然既然是complaints，就说明complaints可能会造成这些regular viewer的流失， 即进一步推翻了原文的conclusion，所以错

C：我认为是反对主旨的，因为其描述大意是只有当他们收到complaints时候，才会将viewer流失的原因归于report；只有收到complaints，和原文中认为人员流失的原因和complaints没有关系完全矛盾了呀 0 0

D：不是第一次发布负面消息，咋地？原文又没有说以前有过drop还是没drop，况且，如果想表达这种负面消息会带来累计的情绪继而导致viewer的流失，我想原文应该会出现什么since three years ago 这种表示持续时间段的描述了吧？总之我看的时候会觉得挺无关的╮(╯▽╰)╭

E： 没人选就不说了（溜