Although computers can enhance people's ability to communicate, comput

C is the best choice. The conclusion states thtat children who spend all their spare time playing computer gams will have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children. This is based on an assumption that children who do not spend all their time playing computer games spend at least some time talking to other people.

(A) out of scope
(B) Doesn't help.
(C) True because the argument assumes that there are only 2 choices.
(D) It is about 'interpersonal' communication skills that the argument says the students lack.
(E) out of scope.

The conclusion is children who spent all their time after school hours playing computers are less experienced than the other children. The assumption lies on the children who do not play computer games that simply their activities is at least giving them more allowance to practice social skills...

A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children.
This is a little tempting... When I was answering this I initially kept it until I found a better answer, but this could be dismissed because the author did not assume that only computer games does that... hence, this is far out to the author's assumption....

B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people.
I ignored be simply because I cannot dismiss it and at the same time, I cannot accept it as the answer. Keep this for now.

C) Children who do not spend all their after hour playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.
Bingo! This is what we are looking for. If children who do not play computer games still did not talk with people then they are no better than the other children. This needs to be assumed for the conclusion to be valid. Best answer.

D and E are irrelevant

This is an easy one. The argument says that playing computer games prevents the time spent doing so from being spent interacting with others. This clearly assumes that were the games not to be played, at least some of that time would be spent in interacting with others. Lets look at the options and verify.

Looking at the options, we can easily pick out C and eliminate the others. Therefore C is the correct answer.

Taking more time to answer CR question. . eps Assumption type.

Conclusion: children who spent their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.
Evidence: computer games are a cause of underdeveloped communication skills in children.

Assumption:
1) only Talking to people will help to increase the Communication skills.
2) Children have only spare time to play Computer games or Talk with people.
3) If children play comp games then they cannot talk with people.

A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children. - Passive activity has nothing to do with talking with people - Weakener
B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people. - - Weakeners
C) Children who do not spend all their after hour playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people. - Correct one. When people do not spend playing cricket then they spend talking with peoples. Same as assumption 3
D) Formal instruction contributes little or nothing to children's acquisition of communication skills. - Irrelevant - Formal instruction contributes little or nothing
E) The mental skills developed through playing computer games do not contribute significantly to children's intellectual development - Irrelevant - Mental skill is not spoke here.

Conclusion: Children who spend all their spare time playing computer games have less experience in interpersonal skills than other children have.

The argument compares interpersonal skills of two groups of children.
Negating the correct answer, that is answer choice (C), :

Children who do not spend all none of their after-school hours not playing computer games spend at least some none of that time talking with other people.

In other words, children who spend after-school hours not playing computer games spend none of that time talking with other people.

Negating the answer choice (C) states just opposite of conclusion, therefore choice (C) is the correct assumption.

Experts,

The conclusion of the above questions states that , "Therefore, children who spent their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have"

What if the conclusion was , "Therefore, children who spent their spare time playing these games have poor experience in interpersonal communication ". Will Option D be a correct answer choice in that case? I am asking this because I eliminated option D on the basis that th conclusion referes to a comparison between two types of children, one who plays games during spare time and one who do not. If this comparison is removed (this is not talked about in premise as well) then option D can be an assumption because then the argument will take the shape of a causal relationship, spare time games -> poor communication skills and Option D defends this conclusion.

Please advise if above is correct as it will help me to judge my reasoning.

Even though advice is sought from experts, I would like to add my line of reasoning.

The premise in the argument states that "After-school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking with people. " Clearly, after-school hours spent talking with people are hours not spent playing computer games.

In order to make option D as assumption, then modified argument must have conclusion: "Therefore, school going children who spent their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have".

The statement in option D then adds necessary input.

Argument Analysis:

Although computers can enhance people's ability to communicate, computer games are a cause of underdeveloped communication skills in children. An opinion
After school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking to people. A background information.
Therefore, children who spent their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have. Conclusion – has a comparison

Assumptions:
a. After school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking to people. Games are not interactive and does not encourage communication.
b. After school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking to people. Solo games does not need more people.
c. Less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have: Other children who do not play computer games or who do not spent their full spare time go out and talk to people. They do not participate in painting, swimming or any other activities that limit their interaction with people to the same level as games do.

Question Stem
The argument depends on which of the following assumption?

A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children. Good but this is not required to be assumed
B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people. Let them choose but argument is about the impact of that selection.
C) Children who do not spend all their after hour playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people. Correct
D) Formal instruction contributes little or nothing to children's acquisition of communication skills. Not concerned about any other method.
E) The mental skills developed through playing computer games do not contribute significantly to children's intellectual development. Bothered about communication at the moment.
Option C

I got it right for three reasons

1) This is an Explanation argument (look for P.O.S.E. on Forum) which asserts that Assumptions for this group relate - among other options - that Event A is the only cause of B. Clearly, among the five options, this is the only one with this format

2) When you negate it, you must do in the two parts :

Children who do not spend all their after hour playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.
Children who ---- spend all their after hour playing computer games spend NONE of that time talking with other people.

3) P.O.E.ing
the reasons stated by the previous users are quite good

P.S. Remember that GMAT is intended to make your life harder and not easier. The answer structure is always the same. Search for "fallacies" and how to fix them.
https://www.800score.com/guidec3.html

Although computers can enhance people's ability to communicate, computer games are a cause of underdeveloped communication skills in children. After school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking to people. Therefore, children who spent their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.

Video Games = Under-developed communication skills in children
Assumption: Children = talking time WHO dont play video games
Rigorous POE

The argument depends on which of the following assumption?

A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children.
Well they do. Because ultimately the person is not going out and talking to people.

B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people.
Having opportunities do not result in developed communication skill.

C) Children who do not spend all their after hour playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.
This is what they assumed and so therefore concluded that video games are not letting children talk to other people

D) Formal instruction contributes little or nothing to children's acquisition of communication skills.
Formal Instruction is not even considered as one of the reasons here.

E) The mental skills developed through playing computer games do not contribute significantly to children's intellectual development
We do not care about mental skills. But about the communication skills.

The argument is that children who spend all their spare time playing computer games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.

This is because:
- computer games are a cause of underdeveloped communication skills in children; and
- time spent after school playing games is time spent not talking to people

The argument compares the social skills of children who video game to children who don't. The assumption made in this comparison is that the children who don't video game don't contradict any of the premises set by the author. That is - they spend time talking to people.

A- Don't get tricked (As I almost was) into over-assuming and thinking that 'passive activities' includes computer games. Even if it did, this statement is beside the scope of the argument.
B - This is another tricky answer as people can be conned into thinking that the author has assumed that "other children" have opportunities to be social. B obscures the premise as we are only concerned with kids who play and kids who dont
C - this is the correct assumption.

In order for the author's argument (his comparison) to be airtight, there must be evidence that the two comparison groups pass his tests. That is, that the "other children" actually socialise.

Can try negating this to see if it weakens the conclusion:
Children who do spend all their after-school hours playing computer games spend at none of that time talking with other people.

This completely nullifies the basis of the author's comparison.

D - formal instruction is irrelevant to the argument

E- intellectual development is irrelevant. We are dealing with social development.

Though not an answer, but a general tip(from Powerscore Bible) for any CR question :

• Read Carefully.
• Take special note of Modifiers
• Give special attention to words like at
• Read like a detective, as if there is some crime which has happened and you have the responsibility to find the convict

As the argument talks about playing computer games alone, it can be safely assumed that children who don't play computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.

Hence, Answer: C

So we know there are two (2) groups – (1) kids who use their after school hours playing comp games and not talk to people and (2) the other group of kids. What do these other children do? Presumably, they talk to other kids. They socialize. They communicate. They build on their interpersonal skills.
The argument depends on which of the following assumption?

(A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children.
Is it really assumed there is some hindrance with the development of communication skills? The conclusion is “children who spent all their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.” We still can’t make the comparison as strongly.

(B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people.
Are they actually interacting with other people? We need to know this to say that one group has “less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.”

(C) Children who do not spend all of their after-school hours playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.
This is the pre-thinking. The assumption is that this other group of children actually do this stuff. Otherwise, how can we make a comparison and state that the group that spends their time playing comp games and not talking to other kids “have less experience in interpersonal communication,” if we don’t know for sure (and say outright and verbalize) that this other group actually spends some time talking with other people. (P.S. the word “some” is the logical opposite of “none.” It’s deceptively a far-reaching word and had a broad definition. If our scope was from 0-100, “some” could technically account for anywhere between 1-100, depending on the context; it just doesn’t account for 0 (aka none)).

(D) Formal instruction contributes little or nothing to children's acquisition of communication skills.
Whether or not it does is irrelevant to the argument. We’re concerned with two group – (1) kids who use their after-school hours playing comp games and not talk to people and (2) the other group of kids. We’re concerned that some kids won’t get that much experience talking with other kids [and gaining those interpersonal skills], not if these kids got formal instruction or not. We want to know if this other group is gaining it by socializing [or something to that effect].

(E) The mental skills developed through playing computer games do not contribute significantly to children's intellectual development
Out of scope. We’re not concerned about this. The conclusion is “children who spent all their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.”

A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children.

The conclusion of the argument is: Children who spent all their spare time playing computer games have lower communication skills than other children who do not spend all their spare time playing computer games.

We don't know that children who do not play video games indulge in watching telivision/music or end up talking to people in part of their spare time. We just know these children who do not indulge in Computer games are better at C.S. than those who spend all their spare time playing C.G.


B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people.

Irrelevant to the scope of the argument. We don't need to assume this to make the conclusion more likely to be true.

C) Children who do not spend all of their after-school hours playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.

Aha! This is correct. If children who do not spend all their time playing C.G. are to be better in Communication skills than those that do spend all their time playing C.G., they must be doing some talking to improve their communication skills. If we negate this statement (i.e. children who do not play C.G. in all their spare time do no talking with other people in the rest of time, then they are no better than those that play computer games in all of their spare time.)


D) Formal instruction contributes little or nothing to children's acquisition of communication skills.

Even if it's not, it is affecting both groups of children equally. The question is of time spent after school therefore this has no bearing on the conclusion.

E) The mental skills developed through playing computer games do not contribute significantly to children's intellectual development

Intellectual development is not being discussed. This is out of scope.

KarishmaB

Could you please share your thoughts on eliminating Option B?

B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after-school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people.

I am finding it difficult to eliminate this kind of option, which seems relevant but doesn't affect the conclusion. My reason to eliminate was that having an opportunity to choose doesn't matter as long as the student plays computer games then that is the time spent not interacting with other people.