Infotek, a computer manufacturer in Katrovia, has just introduced a

Solution
passage analysis                                                  
Infotek, a computer manufacturer in Katrovia, has just introduced a new personal computer model

A new personal computer model has been recently put on the market by Infotek, a computer manufacturer in Katrovia

that sells for significantly less than any other model.

This new model is significantly lower priced than any other model on the market.

 Market research shows, however, that very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price.

But it is proved by market research that there are very few (a very small number) Katrovian households (that do not already own a personal computer) that would buy a computer even if it is priced lower than the other models.
(We can infer here that these Katrovian households are not price conscious)

Therefore, introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

Conclusion: Introducing the new personal computer model significantly lower priced than other models is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes because very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price

pre-thinking                                                                 
Falsification question

In what scenario is introducing the new personal computer model, likely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes?
Given that
the new model is significantly lower priced than the other models,
market research shows, that very few Katrovian households that do not have personal computers would buy the new model.         

Thought Process 

The author’s reasoning is based on a single fact- that Katrovian households that do not have a computer will not be motivated to buy one even if the price is much lower than all other computers in the market. And as a result, the introduction of the lower priced new model will not lead to an overall increase in the number of computers in Katrovian households. But the author here fails to account for Katrovian households that already have computers.



Falsification condition

What if the Katrovian households with personal computers buy another computer because of its low price?

In that case the number of computers in Katrovian homes would increase bringing down our conclusion

Assumption

The Katrovian households that already have personal computers are not going to buy the new model even if it is significantly lower priced than any other model.

Answer Choice Analysis

A
This option tells us how Infotek achieved its lower priced model. It did so by using components of lower quality than those used by other manufacturers

Does it matter how Infotek achieved the low price? Because market research shows the price is not an incentive for households without a computer. What if the components used had been of good quality and higher priced? Would the households then buy it? They may or may not since they are not price conscious and we do not know about their quality consciousness. My conclusion might still stand.

Hence, this is not the answer

B
This option means the main reason given by consumers in Katrovia for replacing a personal computer is to get a model that is an improved one.

This option falls flat. It is not given to us that the new model is an improved one or not. We only know it has a significantly lower price than the others. And we only know that price is not a motivation for new computers buyers.

Does this option have to be true? Let us say this was not the main reason cited.  Then would my conclusion that “introducing the new personal computer model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes” break down? No. The reason behind buying another computer could be anything.

Hence, it is not the answer.

C
This is in line with our pre- thinking assumption” The Katrovian households that already have personal computers are not going to buy the new model even if it is significantly lower priced than any other model.”

Hence, it is the correct answer

D
The option simply says that the price of the other computers will not drop lower than the price of Infotek’s new model in the near future.

Is that why the number of computers in Katrovian households not going to increase? The Katrovian non-computer users are not price conscious. So, whether the price of other computers drops or not, they are not going to buy the computers anyways.

Hence, this is not the answer.

E
This option says the majority of the computers purchased are to be used at homes.

The passage clearly states that we are talking about personal computers for the households. So, the option is partially stating an idea already mentioned in the passage. The part about majority is not applicable to our argument since we are only talking about the computers in the households.

Hence, this option is not correct.

Conclusion - Introducing new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes
Premise - Cost-effective computers of Infotek are selling less than any model.
Households without personal computers would not buy a computer regardless of its price.

Assumption - House holds should not buy another personal computer, if this happens than introduction of new model
might lead to increase of computers.

Using the Assumption-negation technique- can easily assure the assumption answer C if negated weakens the conclusion.
If Katrovians in households that already have computers are likely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.
- than introducing new model is likely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes

[quote="AbdurRakib"]Infotek, a computer manufacturer in Katrovia, has just introduced a new personal computer model that sells for significantly less than any other model. Market research shows, however, that very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price. Therefore, introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) Infotek achieved the lower price of the new model by using components of lower quality than those used by other manufacturers.
B) The main reason cited by consumers in Katrovia for replacing a personal computer is the desire to have an improved model.
C) Katrovians in households that already have computers are unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.
D) The price of other personal computers in Karovia is unlikely to drop below the price of Infotek’s new model in the near future.
E) Most personal computers purchased in Katrovia are intended for home use.

Here the conclusion is "introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes."
and this conclusion is based on the premise "that very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price"

but here is the gap
what about old customers or customers who already have pcs.
C indicates the same
on negating C we find that negated option C shatters the conclusion.

Premise: Infotek, a computer manufacturer in Katrovia, has just introduced a new personal computer model that sells for significantly less than any other model.
Premise: Market research shows, however, that very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price.

Conclusion: Therefore, introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

- PRICE is not the major contributor to the decision of buying a PC
- There are other specifications that matter MORE


A) Infotek achieved the lower price of the new model by using components of lower quality than those used by other manufacturers.
QUALITY ? We do not know if this is an important factor or not in the buying decision ?
Incorrect.

B) The main reason cited by consumers in Katrovia for replacing a personal computer is the desire to have an improved model.
But how does this helps the conclusion ?
Incorrect

C) Katrovians in households that already have computers are unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.
Negated statement: Katrovians in households that already have computers ARE LIKELY to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.
This choice clearly shatters the conclusion because it states opposite of what is stated in the conclusion.
Correct.

D) The price of other personal computers in Karovia is unlikely to drop below the price of Infotek’s new model in the near future.
Incorrect because it does not help in understanding that WHY the number of models of the new PC would not increase in the households ?

E) Most personal computers purchased in Katrovia are intended for home use.
Irrelevant.

Given the premise, "Market research shows, however, that very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price," the target segment is "households WITHOUT personal computers"

Since Option C talks about those who already have at least one computer, is Option C out of scope?

Be really, really, really careful with the phrase "out of scope." Where that's a consideration is when an answer choice is out of scope of the conclusion. But here the conclusion is:

Therefore, introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

Note that the conclusion doesn't care whether those homes already have a computer or not - it's just concerned with the number of computers in (any) Katrovian homes.

The phrase you're talking about is a premise, not a conclusion. It divides all Katrovian homes (the scope of the conclusion) into two categories: 1) those that already have computers (for whom this new, lower-priced model won't have an impact), and 2) homes that already have a computer. The premise says that the plan won't address group #1, so if you recognize that gap you can anticipate that the right answer has to do with group #2.

Back to the larger point: be (really really really) careful with "out of scope" as a standalone phrase...I see people use it a lot as a proxy for "I don't understand it" or "I don't like it." What it really means if used correctly is that you 1) understand the specific scope of the conclusion and then 2) recognize that an answer choice misses that specific scope of the conclusion. The larger message is "the conclusion is king" - you have to understand the specifics of the conclusion and then use that to determine where the gap in logic is. Here to me that's "hey the conclusion is about all homes but the main premise only deals with one type of homes - those without computers - so the argument is missing information about the other type of homes, those that already have computers."

Solution

Passage Analysis

• Infotek, a computer manufacturer in Katrovia, has just introduced a new personal computer model

o Infotek is a manufacturer of computers in Katrovia.
o Infotek has recently introduced a new model of personal computer (PC).

• that sells for significantly less than any other model.

o The new PC model introduced is cheaper than any other PC in the market.

• Market research shows, however, that very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price.

o A market research was conducted involving Katrovian households.
o Not encouragingly, the results of the research suggested that only a few Katrovian households without a PC will buy a computer.
o This decision of the households is unaffected by the price of the model.

• Therefore, introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

o Based on these results, the author concludes that bringing this new cheaper model PC to the market will not probably cause an increase in the number of computers in Katrovian households.

Conclusion: Introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

Question Stem Analysis
This question asks us to identify the assumption behind the argument.

Pre-thinking

Falsification Question
In what scenario is it possible that introduction of the new model is not unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes?
Given that

• The new model is cheaper than any other personal computer in the market.
• Market research shows that very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price.

Thought Process
The author agrees with the market research that indicates the significantly lower price of the new PC model will not make many Katrovian households without a computer buy one. We can infer that the reason most of these households did not buy a PC is unrelated to the cost of the purchase. But the market research says nothing about households that already possess at least one PC. We do not know if these households may purchase an extra PC if it is available at a very low price. Hence the conclusion depends on the unmentioned entity, namely, Katrovian households already having at least one PC.

Falsification condition
What if the households which already possess at least one PC choose to buy an extra PC if a model with such a low price is available?
In that case the facts hold but the conclusion breaks down.
Assumption
The households that already possess at least one PC will not choose to buy an extra PC even if a model with such low price becomes available.

Answer Choice Analysis

(A) Infotek achieved the lower price of the new model by using components of lower quality than those used by other manufacturers.
INCORRECT
This information does not affect the conclusion in any way as there are no claims made regarding the quality of components used in the model. Hence, this cannot be a correct assumption.

(B) The main reason cited by consumers in Katrovia for replacing a personal computer is the desire to have an improved model.
INCORRECT
The replacement of a computer currently in use will not bring any change in the number of computers used in Katrovian homes. So, the reason for replacement is irrelevant in the passage context. Hence this cannot be the correct choice.

(C) Katrovians in households that already have computers are unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.
CORRECT
This is in line with our pre-thinking and hence the correct choice.

(D) The price of other personal computers in Katrovia is unlikely to drop below the price of Infotek’s new model in the near future.
INCORRECT
This assumption is unnecessary for the conclusion to hold because, as we have inferred, the households without at least one PC are not likely to change their decisions according to the price of computers. Therefore, this cannot be the correct answer.

(E) Most personal computers purchased in Katrovia are intended for home use.
INCORRECT
This is not a relevant piece of additional information as we are concerned only about PCs in household use. Therefore, this cannot be the right choice.

GMATNinja Could you please help explain all 5 choices one by one? And also, the correct one seems to be out of scope since the argument only mentions about households without computers. (The correct choice mentions about with computers.)

Hi

Let me try to address your query. Analyzing the stimulus, we have:

Conclusion: Introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

Premise on which it is based (why): Very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price.

There is a subtle language shift in the conclusion. While the premise mentions households without personal computers, the conclusion talks about all types of Katrovian homes ie; those with computers as well as those without. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the conclusion assumes that the households that already have a computer too would not purchase the new computer launched by Infotek (since the premise already tells us that the households without computers would not buy it).

Let us analyze the answer options:

(A) Infotek achieved the lower price of the new model by using components of lower quality than those used by other manufacturers. The conclusion is regarding households purchasing computers, which is not addressed by this option. Irrelevant. Eliminate.

(B) The main reason cited by consumers in Katrovia for replacing a personal computer is the desire to have an improved model. This does not tell us anything about how lower price impacts computer purchase decisions of Katrovia households. Eliminate.

(C) Katrovians in households that already have computers are unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use. Correct. Consistent with our pre-thinking. Please not the explanation provided above as to why this is relevant to the conclusion.

(D) The price of other personal computers in Karovia is unlikely to drop below the price of Infotek’s new model in the near future. Same as (A). Eliminate.

(E) Most personal computers purchased in Katrovia are intended for home use. Same as (A) and (D). Eliminate.

Hope this helps.

Infotek, a computer manufacturer in Katrovia, has just introduced a new personal computer model that sells for significantly less than any other model. Market research shows, however, that very few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price. Therefore, introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

P: Infotek has just introduced a new cpu model that sells for less than any other model
P: But, very few households without personal cpus would buy a cpu, irrespective of price
C: Introducing the new model is unlikely to increase the # of cpus in homes

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Infotek achieved the lower price of the new model by using components of lower quality than those used by other manufacturers.

Explains how the lower price was achieved. Not an assumption. X

(B) The main reason cited by consumers in Katrovia for replacing a personal computer is the desire to have an improved model.

Well, doesn’t this give us reason to think that more cpus WILL increase in homes? This could seem to weaken the argument, although we’d have to tack on a few more details to make it so. Hence, it’s not clear what the effect of this is.

(C) Katrovians in households that already have computers are unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.

Correct. So the passage says that the households that don’t already have personal cpus would buy one regardless of price. It then proceeds to conclude that the new model is unlikely to increase the number of cpus in homes. Wait a minute. There’s a gap. What if there are other means by which a cpu could end up in a home? Suppose homes that already have cpus purchase the new model…then in that case the number of cpus in homes WILL increase. So it’s necessary to assume that these homes aren’t likely to purchase.

(D) The price of other personal computers in Karovia is unlikely to drop below the price of Infotek’s new model in the near future.

It’s not exactly clear how this affects the conclusion. If the price of other models is unlikely to drop below the price of Infotek’s new model, then perhaps we have more reason to think that Infotek’s will end up in people’s home…but the argument suggests that few people would buy it. On the other hand, what what if they are likely to drop below the price of Infotek? Again maybe more computers end up in people’s homes. In either case, this choice certainly doesn’t act as an assumption that is necessary for the conclusion that the new model is UNLIKELY to increase the NUMBER of cpus in homes.

(E) Most personal computers purchased in Katrovia are intended for home use.

OK, extra fluffy detail.

$$ New model < $$ Other models
VERY FEW with No PCs at home will buy (without thinking of $$ of that PC)
Conclusion: New model intro in market ==> No increase in PCs in households.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Infotek achieved the lower price of the new model by using components of lower quality than those used by other manufacturers. = Out of scope.

(B) The main reason cited by consumers in Katrovia for replacing a personal computer is the desire to have an improved model. = Even after negating this, we dont know what the main reason is and it doesnt affect the conclusion at all.

(C) Katrovians in households that already have computers are unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use. =
Negated stmt: Katrovians in households that already have computers ARE LIKELY to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.
This will lead to an increase in PCs at home, conclusion doesnt hold. Correct.

(D) The price of other personal computers in Karovia is unlikely to drop below the price of Infotek’s new model in the near future. =
Negated stmt: The price of other personal computers in Karovia IS LIKELY to drop below the price of Infotek’s new model in the near future.
So what? Will people buy more PCs if price of other models drop? We dont know.

(E) Most personal computers purchased in Katrovia are intended for home use.
Negated stmt: Most personal computers purchased in Katrovia are NOT intended for home use.
Even if they are not intended to use at home, will people in Katrovia buy more PCs since new model has launched? We dont know.

AndrewN,

On the first read of option B. Doesn't this weaken the conclusion?
The conclusion says that "introducing the new model won't increase the no. of computers in Katrovian homes".
Option B says that the main reason cited for replacing a computer is to have an improved model. So there is a slight possibility that the no. of computers would go up in Katrovian homes. So this weakens the conclusion.

Please share your two cents.

KD

Hello, KD. Notice, first that this is not a weaken question, but an assumption question, so our task is to find a piece of information that ties together the premise and the conclusion. I suppose the total number of computers in Katrovian households could increase if we ourselves assume that replacing in answer choice (B) means that Katrovians are not getting rid of their old machines but keeping them in the household. But that is not the way an assumption question is designed. Rather, I prefer to drag and drop the supposed assumption between the premise and conclusion to test for logical fluidity:

Premise: [V]ery few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price.

Assumption: The main reason cited by consumers in Katrovia for replacing a personal computer is the desire to have an improved model.

Conclusion: Therefore, introducing the new model [of computer] is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

That seems amiss, the supposed assumption disjointed from the surrounding information. Even if people desire to have an improved model of computer, there is nothing in the assumption that indicates this group is waiting to buy the new model. Compare to (C):

Premise: [V]ery few Katrovian households without personal computers would buy a computer, regardless of its price.

Assumption: Katrovians in households that already have computers are unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.

Conclusion: Therefore, introducing the new model [of computer] is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.

This makes a lot more sense, with the assumption telling us directly that the only other group of people who would buy a home computer, people who already own one, is also unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model. If neither people who do not own a computer (premise) nor people who do currently own one (assumption) are likely to buy the new Infotek computer, then the conclusion seems quite reasonable.

Perhaps the two answer choices make more sense now. Thank you for thinking to ask. (And be careful not to use one-step-removed logic to justify an answer. The correct option should fit in seamlessly with the information the passage provides.)

- Andrew

The argument depends on which of the following assumptions:

(C) Katrovians in households that already have computers are unlikely to purchase the new Infotek model as an additional computer for home use.

The argument assumes that the market for personal computers in Katrovia consists mainly of households that do not already have a computer. Therefore, the introduction of a cheaper computer model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes. This assumption is necessary for the conclusion that the new model is unlikely to increase the number of computers in Katrovian homes.