ChaseDream
搜索
12下一页
返回列表 发新帖
00:00:00

People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies. Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest grounds for the experts' conclusion?

正确答案: A

更多相关帖子

524

帖子

15

好友

4712

积分

ChaseDream

注册时间
2003-03-17
精华
8
解析
查看: 7661|回复: 19
打印 上一主题 下一主题

请教一道逻辑:GWD26-22

[复制链接]
楼主
发表于 2006-11-5 16:04:00 | 只看该作者

请教一道逻辑:GWD26-22

People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop

animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current

employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies.

Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general

population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact

with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent

but substantially more.

 

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest grounds for the experts’

conclusion?

A.     A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very

likely to switch to some other occupation.

B.     A zoo employee is more likely than a person in the general population

to keep one or more animal pets at home

C.     The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to

animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.

D.     Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal-

induced allergy than exposure to many of the animals kept in zoos.

E.      Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals

in their care.

参考答案是A。这也是CD17-22题,偶实在有点不明就里,这里对动物有敏感症的动物公园员工转换工作

对结论有什么support作用呢?谢谢!

哦,想想又好像明白啦!就是说动物公园的员工染上病的不少都转换工作啦,亦就是说现在survey已经是underestimate了那个比例啦,所以在一般人之中,如果也像公园员工一样频繁接触动物的染上病的比例就应该更高啦!偶的理解不知对不对,谢谢指教!


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-11-5 16:06:19编辑过]
沙发
发表于 2006-11-5 16:23:00 | 只看该作者

lz的想法虽然能做出答案,但我认为想法是不对滴!

支持题的前提是没有这个支持条件原文推论也成立,所以不存在lz说的survey被understimate的问题.

a 答案加入题干中可使普通人群中动物过敏的人数增加,那么此类人的比例增大,从而加强expert的结论

板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2006-11-5 21:08:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用lucyzl517在2006-11-5 16:23:00的发言:

lz的想法虽然能做出答案,但我认为想法是不对滴!

支持题的前提是没有这个支持条件原文推论也成立,所以不存在lz说的survey被understimate的问题.

a 答案加入题干中可使普通人群中动物过敏的人数增加,那么此类人的比例增大,从而加强expert的结论

嗯,其实之前我也有想过lucy说的这个问题,但系再又觉得动物管理员不会有多少吧,而普通人群中与动物有亲密接触的人这个基数其实是很大的,即使加入了几个动物管理员对比例应该不会产生什么影响吧。。。

偶认为这个underestimate是相对的,并不说这个survey是不准的意思,只是就目前的情况而论,的确存在一些有过敏症的动物管理员已经离职而没有算到survey里面,所以才会认为这个比例应该更高一点才贴近普通人群的实际比例。

不知偶有没想错呢?

地板
发表于 2006-11-7 12:48:00 | 只看该作者

after add A into the inference of the arg we will drawn the conclusion much more powerful.

If zoo employees who got the virous convert their jobs  and new staff come into zoo ,the amount of human beings who got the viours will be even larger .So if  30 percent had animal-induced allergies in current employees in major zoos,the total amount of people with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.


[此贴子已经被作者于2006-11-7 12:48:39编辑过]
5#
发表于 2006-11-12 13:32:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用gonghao在2006-11-7 12:48:00的发言:

after add A into the inference of the arg we will drawn the conclusion much more powerful.

If zoo employees who got the virous convert their jobs  and new staff come into zoo ,the amount of human beings who got the viours will be even larger .So if  30 percent had animal-induced allergies in current employees in major zoos,the total amount of people with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.


版主的意思是 zoo工人 有了角色的转换, 他们染病之后不在zoo干了,去干别的,这时候他们就属于general population范畴了? 

  没想到这么复杂....

6#
发表于 2006-12-24 23:14:00 | 只看该作者

 就是说动物公园的员工染上病的不少都转换工作啦,亦就是说现在survey已经是underestimate了那个比例啦,

其实这个比例应该更高, 只不过感染重病的人都走了,

\同意JOJO的说法~!!

7#
发表于 2006-12-25 10:26:00 | 只看该作者
同意,动物园的30%其实低估了,因为动物园员工由于一些人受不了过敏需要换工作,大量新员工需要补充,这使得动物园的过敏员工比例可以维持在30%的低水平。
8#
发表于 2007-6-1 17:25:00 | 只看该作者
:由于过敏严重者会换工作,所以zoo里始终保持30%的人过敏;而在普通人群当中,即使过敏也不可能离开动物,所以比例会高于30%。
9#
发表于 2007-8-31 10:30:00 | 只看该作者
up
10#
发表于 2007-9-5 00:16:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用lucyzl517在2006-11-5 16:23:00的发言:

lz的想法虽然能做出答案,但我认为想法是不对滴!

支持题的前提是没有这个支持条件原文推论也成立,所以不存在lz说的survey被understimate的问题.

a 答案加入题干中可使普通人群中动物过敏的人数增加,那么此类人的比例增大,从而加强expert的结论

这个说法是不对的,因为工作人员离开动物园后,不一定就属于经常接触动物的人群,而原文是说跟动物园工作人员一样接触动物时间长的人易患过敏的比例。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-9 03:54
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部