GMAT写作是GMAT考试中的一个重要组成部分，考生在备考阶段一定不要忽视GMAT写作的重要作用。接下来小编将结合具体的题目分析为大家带来GMAT分析性写作常见错误之混淆因果关系，希望对大家的写作备考有帮助。
什么是混淆因果关系类错误
混淆因果关系类错误常常指把没有因果联系的两个事物生硬的联系在一起，没有搞清楚二者间的前因后果。这是GMAT写作“七宗罪”中的一种，一般来说出现这类错误的题干中给出的解释和得出的结论没有因果上的联系，或者是二者毫不相关。如：北京雾霾产生的原因有很多，不能看到雾霾就认为是汽车排放尾气造成的，而是要找出证据，证实二者之间确实存在一定的因果联系，要具体问题具体分析。
淆因果关系英文表述如下：
The author commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification. The line of the reasoning is that because a occurred before B, the former event is responsible for the latter. But this is fallacious reasoning unless other possible causal explanations have been considered and ruled out. For example, perhaps C is the cause of these events or perhaps B is caused by D.
如何识别混淆因果关系类错误
混淆因果关系类错误有明显的特征，考生在进行GMAT写作备考前一定要先了解其具体的特点，然后根据自己掌握的知识在实战中巧妙识别这类错误并展开针对性的论证。
1. 因果关系问题中通常原因是正确的，尽管还有其他的一些原因也可以推出这个结论，但是不能否认这个原因的正确性。
2. 此因未必是导致结果的“原因”，但这个“因”是真实存在的。
3. 无因果联系是针对已经发生的现象来寻找原因，该现象有可能几个原因导致，不一定是论证中那一个导致的。更多相关内容请点击》如何组织GMAT分析性写作。
混淆因果关系类错误真题解析
The following appeared as part of an article in the business section of a local newspaper:
"Hippocrene Plumbing Supply recently opened a wholesale outlet in the location once occupied by the Cumquat Cafe. Hippocrene has apparently been quite successful there because it is planning to open a large outlet in a nearby city. But the Cumquat Cafe, one year after moving to its new location, has seen its volume of business drop somewhat from the previous year's. Clearly, the former site was the better business location, and the Cumquat Cafe has made a mistake in moving to its new address."
Discuss how well reasoned ... etc.
翻译：地方报纸的商业版： Hippocrene铅管供应商在一度为Cumquat咖啡店的地方开了一家直销店。Hippocrene现在相当的成功，因为他们正计划在临近城市开一家大的直销店。但是Cumquat咖啡店在搬到新地址一年后发现它的业务量比前一年有所下降。很明显，它的前一个地址是一个更好的商务地址，Cumquat咖啡店作出搬迁决定是错误的。
逻辑错误分析：1. 无因果联系，开分店未必能说明H经营得很不错。因为开分店可能有其他的原因，而未必是经营得好才扩张。比如他们在这个地方经营得不够理想，所以想通过分店来作为跳板，进军其他的城市。
2. 混淆因果联系，即使咖啡店的利润在未来仍然会下滑，这也未必说明这是由于搬迁造成的。这两者仅仅是时间相关，可能有其他的原因导致了咖啡店利润的下降。比如咖啡店搬迁后遭遇了金融危机，城市的高失业率使得人们不敢出来消费。从而导致了咖啡店利润的下滑。
参考范文：
(原稿空缺)Business is obviously unsuitable to the location. On the other hand, a bank in the same location might be extremely successful simply because of its suitability to the location.
In the third place, the author’s claim that Hippocrene has been successful at Cumquat’s previous location is unwarranted. The fact that Hippocrene intends to open a new outlet is insufficient to establish this claim. It is possible that the plan to open a new outlet was prompted by a lack of business at the Cumquat location.
Finally, the author unfairly assumes that one year’s time at the new location is adequate to conclude whether Cumquat made a mistake in moving to that location. Its is entirely possible that given more time, perhaps another year or so, Cumquat will become profitable at the location. Common sense informs me that this is a distinct possibility, since it often takes more than one year for a restaurant to establish a customer base at a given location.
In conclusion, the author’s argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the conclusion the author would have to evaluate other possible causes of the performance of the businesses and eliminate all except location as the cause in each case. Additionally, it would be necessary to show that location rather than suitability to a location was the cause of the success of Hippocrene and the failure of Cumquat.
以上就是GMAT分析性写作常见错误之混淆因果关系的主要内容，希望考生能够对文章中介绍的解题方法有所了解并不断提升自己的解题能力。更多关于GMAT备考的资讯小编会持续为大家送上，祝大家早日梦圆名校。
您还可能关注：
