Re: [問題] GWD CR的一題 TN-20 19題

看板GMAT (GMAT入學考試)作者buttheadd (butthead)時間16年前 (2009/10/12 19:25)推噓1(1推 0噓 0→)

留言1則, 1人參與討論串2/2 (看更多)

※ 引述《wonderfulsea (不mind男孩)》之銘言： : 標題: [問題] GWD CR的一題 TN-20 19題 : 時間: Mon Oct 12 17:15:44 2009 : : Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do. Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job. : : Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above? : : Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave. : : Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs. : : Workers who would permanently lose their jobs if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal their problem and continue working for as long as possible. : : People who hold safety-sensitive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems. : : Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employee error. : : 上面五行是選項~答案是C : : 感覺C只是在講一個條件~ : 我選D 有倒因為果的感覺~雖然不夠強烈~但應該還是比C好 : : 請問這題要該怎麼看呢? 此題關鍵在問 "禁止曾經酗酒的人從事安全性工作" 是否能 "減少危安事故" C:因為導致工人任刻意隱瞞酗酒,反而導致危險因素更多 => 否定上述結果 D:此處並非倒因為果, D說高安全性工作的壓力會惡化生活習慣, 包含喝酒說明高安全性工作不適合喝酒的人, 所以排除這些人是可以減少危安事故某種程度上還算support 還請參考吧 : : -- : ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) : ◆ From: 61.224.69.179 : ※ 編輯: wonderfulsea 來自: 61.224.69.179 (10/12 17:16) -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 122.124.103.112