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写作可疑调查逻辑错误真题解析，希望对大家的写作备考有帮助。
GMAT写作可疑调查逻辑错误
可疑调查具体是指作者提供的证据是片面的或者是有限的，不能保证结论的顺利推出。可疑调查主要侧重于指调查来源不清楚，含糊的说根据某某调查，具体证据一带而过甚至没有提及。例如：据一项问卷调查显示，在中国20%的学生人群存在不同程度的抑郁倾向。首先，问卷调查的机构不明确，学生人群的具体指向不明确，抑郁的程度不明确，这样的调查会显得很粗糙，没有足够的说服力，不容易使人信服。
可疑调查英文表述：Survey is doubtful
The poll cited by the author is too vague to be informative. The claim does not indicate who conducted the poll, who responded, or when, where and how the poll was conducted. (Lacking information about the number of people surveyed and the number of respondents, it is impossible to access the validity of the results. For example, if 200 persons were surveyed but only 2 responded, the conclusion that...would be highly suspect. Because the argument offers no evidence that would rule out this kind of interpretations,) Until these questions are answered, the results of the survey are worthless as evidence for the conclusion.
可疑调查逻辑错误的特点
1. 指调查过程中的问题。简单来说就是调查过程中选择的样本是否恰当。这样的样本是否具有典型代表性。选取数量是否科学，以及被调查的人有没有说假话等等。
2. 调查结果问题。简单来说就是调查结果在填写的过程中是否保证了数据的准确性。如果数据填写不够准确怎么办?如果回应者仅代表个人观点，或局部受限的观点，不能反应全局怎么办?这些都是考生在审题时应该注意的，可以作为文章反驳的论据。更多相关内容请点击》GMAT写作零基础该如何备考。
可疑调查逻辑错误真题解析
The following appeared in a memorandum from the human resources department of Diversified Manufacturing:
"Managers at our central office report that their employees tend to be most productive in the days immediately preceding a vacation. To help counteract our declining market share, we could increase the productivity of our professional staff members, who currently receive four weeks paid vacation a year, by limiting them to a maximum of one week's continuous vacation time. They will thus take more vacation breaks during a year and give us more days of maximum productivity."
Discuss how well reasoned ... etc.
翻译： 我们中心办公室的经理报告说他们的雇员在紧跟在度假后的几天中显得最有生产力。为了帮助扭转我们的市场份额下滑的情况，通过限制我们的专业技术员工每次最长休假时间为一周，我们可以增加他们的生产力。他们目前一年有4周的带薪休假，由此，一年中他们将休更多的假期，也给我们带来更多的极富生产力的日子。
分析：1.可疑调查，经理的报告未必能说明员工在休假后生产力最强。因为这个报告既没有说明得到结论的样本数量，也没有说明样本的选择方法，所以可能有样本选择类的错误。那么其结论也未必有代表性。2.错误类比，即使经理的报告确实说明了员工在放假后能够提高生产力，这一结论也未必适用于技术类的员工。因为经理的报告只是所有员工的一个平均，而未必就是技术员工的情况。如果技术类员工的工作连续性较强，容易受到休假的影响，那么作者的结论就未必成立了。3.样本不足，即使技术类员工也能在放假后提高生产力，这一建议也未必是合理的。因为首先，这一措施可能会带来员工的不满与流失，而这未必是可以接受的;而其次，这一建议也未必是最佳的，可能有其他更好的方法来提高生产力， 比如给工作表现优秀的员工以物质鼓励，等等。
参考范文：
The argument states that by limiting their employees to a maximum of one week's continuous vacation time than a four weeks paid vacation a year, the Company is expecting an increase in its professional staff members productivity. And thus it can expect an increase in the market share, which is right now declining. The fundamental logic of the argument itself is parodying. As it mention in the beginning of the argument that managers at its central office report that its employees tend to be more productive in the days immediately preceding a vacation. And if it plan gets implemented the basic expectation in the increase in the productivity would get infected.
To begin with, though the company spotted its problem of the decline in the market share, it failed to provide the consequences for the decline and it linked the problem with the employees productivity. And conclude to limit its employees vacation to a maximum of one week's continuous vacation. The decline in the market share may be due to some other consequences such as, increase in competition, customer dissatisfaction, poor budgeting, natural calamities and more.
In addition to that, by limiting its employees vacation time, the employees most productive days may limited to one time. And it may lead the company to further decline in the market shares. As per the report of the managers at the central office, they have stated that the employees were tend to be more productive in the days preceding a vacation. It is clear that the employees were more productive before the days of the vacation, means that as per the current procedure they are providing more productivity since they are having a four weeks paid vacation. So the before each vacation they are providing more productivity.
If the author, wants to persuade the argument, he should provide proper evidence to prove that the decline in the market share is due to the low productivity of the employees and the low productivity is due to the current four weeks vacation time a year. For the reasons stated above the argument is flaw
以上就是GMAT写作可疑调查逻辑错误真题解析的全部内容，希望考生能不断改进自己的学习方法，提升效率获得理想的成绩，更多相关内容百利天下小编会持续为大家送上，祝大家都能早日梦圆名校。
您还可能关注：
