Videocassette recorders (VCRs) enable people to watch movies at home on videotape. People who own VCRs go to movie theaters more often than do people who do not own VCRs. Contrary to popular belief, therefore, owning a VCR actually stimulates people to go to movie theaters more often than they otherwise would.

The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

(A) concludes that a claim must be false because of the mere absence of evidence in its favor

(B) cites in support of the conclusion evidence that is inconsistent with other information that is provided

(C) fails to establish that the phenomena interpreted as cause and effect are not both direct effects of some other factor

(D) takes a condition that by itself guarantees the occurrence of a certain phenomenon to be a condition that therefore must be met for that phenomenon to occur

(E) bases a broad claim about the behavior of people in general on a comparison between two groups of people that together include only a small proportion of people overall

Is it C?

I pick "C".....there may be other causes for ppl with VCRs to go to movies e.g. they genuinely like movies.

i pick C too.

these 2 factors are not cause and effect.

(C)

OA is C.

But why we can prove that the frequency talked in the passage doesn't underlie the reason that owning a VCR actually stimulates people to go to movie theaters.


Thanks

Fact: VCR owners go to movie theaters more often than non VCR owners.
Conclusion: VCR stimulates people to go to theaters.

Fault in reasoning: Perhaps people who like to watch moview would buy VCRs AND go to theaters more often. In other words, it's not because having VCRs has made them going to theaters more often. Both VCR and going to theaters often are results of anther factor, their liking to watch movies.


If the fact is that "non VCR owners do not go to theaters more often", then this would be our choice. Since the absense of evidence showing non VCR owners watching more movies would be used to support the claim was wrong. However the evidence presented here is actually directly supporting the conclusion that is countering the claim.


We don't know about that. As no other information is provided in the passage.


One possibility that it fail to root out is that they are both direct effect of another factor, for example, how people like to watch moview. Therefore it can not be convincing in establish its conclusion that VCR directly caused going to theater more often.
Correct.


Sounds very complicated. An example of this is: "The earth is round. Why? Because if it is not round then it cannot be earth!"


If the stem says a survey of say high school children presented the fact, and then it make the conclusion on the people as a whole, then this would be the choice.
_________________

Keep on asking, and it will be given you;
keep on seeking, and you will find;
keep on knocking, and it will be opened to you.

OA is C and this is another sub-500 level question which 99/100 people get right.
_________________

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.

go for C

+1 C
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates