GMATPREP- Hawthorne Works

[RonPurewal]

Why it is the effects that are being investigated but not the changes? Even after reading the whole sentence for several times I still don't understand why can't the changes be investigated? It makes sense.

Using the context, think about what they experimenters did.

"- They played around with work conditions.
"- They looked at workers' performance under those different conditions.
(This is the only reasonable interpretation of the given text. If the end goal were to analyze changes in working conditions themselves, then the workers' performance would be irrelevant.)

So, they didn't "examine" the working conditions themselves"”those were under their control.
What they "examined" was, instead, the way the workers' performance changed as a result of those changes.

As an analogy, it's like controlling the temperature of an oven (= controlling the working conditions), and then examining the changes in how a dish bakes (= changes in workers' performance).

[lemonperb]

Why it is the effects that are being investigated but not the changes? Even after reading the whole sentence for several times I still don't understand why can't the changes be investigated? It makes sense.

Using the context, think about what they experimenters did.

"- They played around with work conditions.
"- They looked at workers' performance under those different conditions.
(This is the only reasonable interpretation of the given text. If the end goal were to analyze changes in working conditions themselves, then the workers' performance would be irrelevant.)

So, they didn't "examine" the working conditions themselves"”those were under their control.
What they "examined" was, instead, the way the workers' performance changed as a result of those changes.

As an analogy, it's like controlling the temperature of an oven (= controlling the working conditions), and then examining the changes in how a dish bakes (= changes in workers' performance).

Got it. I love your explanation!
Thank you Ron!

[RonPurewal]

You're welcome

[frankieguo]

(b) is the best choice here.

(a) is vague because it's overly indirect: the meaning of "investigate changes ... as to their effects" is unclear. what's more, it's probably considered unidiomatic as well, at least in this sort of context.

(b) = correct
the participle "investigating" follows "experiments" immediately. no filler words are necessary; this is good concision.
the wording is clear; there are no awkward double possessives, etc., as in some of the other choices.
"would" is used properly here, as a past-tense form of "will". (i.e., if this sentence were translated into the present tense, it would read "...that changes ... will have")

(c) is ridiculously wordy; there's no way you should give this choice any serious consideration. if you don't realize pretty quickly that this choice is wrong, you should go back and read through a bunch of correct OG answers, trying to internalize the sights and sounds (the "vibe") of the correct answers.

(d) "changes in working conditions' effects" is at best awkward and vague, and at worst ambiguous: the intended meaning is the effects of the changes, but this sentence seems to indicated the effects of the conditions themselves. in other words, a literal reading of this sentence seems to indicate that the conditions themselves haven't changed - only their effects have. that's not the intended meaning of the original.

(e) "what the effects" is ungrammatical.
also, in constructions of this sort, "what" is generally redundant / unnecessary; it's better merely to say "to investigate X" rather than to say "to investigate what X is" (or other such wordy construction).

Hi, Ron. I have a question here.
I was taught before in my country to say: I want to know who she is; I want to figure out what amount of resources I need for this project.
It's easy to add a clause begin with "wh"
is it wrong?
The first sense I have is "what effects" rather than effect.
Thank you!!!

[RonPurewal]

Hi, Ron. I have a question here.
I was taught before in my country to say: I want to know who she is; I want to figure out what amount of resources I need for this project.

if "say" actually means "say", then that's the problem--spoken english and written english are, quite literally, two different languages.
"say" is the wrong language.

in general, you won't see "what + noun" (with "what" as adjective) in formal written english, unless it's the start of a question.
in other instances, you should be able to substitute "the + noun".
e.g.,
i want to establish what amount of resources... --> informal / spoken english
i want to establish the amount of resources... --> formal written english

[RonPurewal]

if the sentence describes a choice from a set of possibilities, you may see "which + noun";
having reviewed the three proposals for the total cost of the project, we now seek to determine which amount is the most realistic.

and, of course, sentences with "what" itself acting as a noun/pronoun (i don't know the terms, but they don't matter) are commonplace:
no one will ever know what happened in those final moments.
we don't know what consumers will think of the new design.
note that the second example is NOT "what consumers". rather, "what" is the object of "consumers will think".

[jabgt]

Ron: I eliminate the choice E. But I don't know whether my reasoning is right. Plz correct me if not.
I think the biggest error in E is about "to investigate....". It seems to me that the purpose of "the company was the scene" is to investigate..... And that doesn't make any sense. So I eliminate this choice.

Not necessarily, since "to investigate" could make sense as a modifier of "experiments".

Analogy:
Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, was the scene of the Wright brothers' first succsesful attempt to fly a heavier-than-air craft.

Understood. Here "experiments investigating / to investigate / that investigate the effects" is just red herring. ( I learn this word from Ron. )

Here this usage is analogous to "Australian embryologists have found evidence to suggest / suggesting / that suggests that ..." , as you have taught us that "to suggest"="suggesting" in this context and that "that suggests that" is not wrong but a bit ugly in style.

Ron's another lecture that address this usage is here:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... %20#p33647

[RonPurewal]

yes.