Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 04:20 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 04:20
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
505-555 Level|   Weaken|                     
User avatar
MBAB123
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2020
Last visit: 30 Jul 2023
Posts: 563
Own Kudos:
318
Given Kudos: 151
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
WE:Accounting (Accounting)
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
Posts: 563
Kudos: 318
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 28 Feb 2021, 04:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Ibrahim13
The answer is C,The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work. Because argument with colleagues is not in the Passage.

Posted from my mobile device
Show more

But how exactly does that weaken the argument?
User avatar
DmitryFarber
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Last visit: 08 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,020
Own Kudos:
8,563
 [2]
Given Kudos: 57
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85
Posts: 3,020
Kudos: 8,563
 [2]
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 28 Feb 2021, 19:09
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Ibrahim13
Did you mean to say that this is why C is not the answer? D is definitely the answer, but we can't rule out C simply because it mentions a new idea. It's very common to strengthen or weaken an argument by introducing or ruling out some previously unmentioned factor. The problem with C is that it doesn't help us sort out which factor is causing the other. If couples with different sleep schedules have more marital troubles and tend to fight with their colleagues, then the sleep schedules could be the cause of both problems. It certainly could be that the fights at work were causing both the sleep disruptions and the marital troubles, but we don't have any way to tell whether that's true, so C leaves us no more clear on the ultimate cause than we were before.
avatar
Ibrahim13
avatar
Joined: 27 Nov 2020
Last visit: 04 Mar 2021
Posts: 8
Given Kudos: 9
Posts: 8
Kudos: 0
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 28 Feb 2021, 23:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Its common sense, when it says that individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work. And can you please explain why you think D is the answer.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,884
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,884
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 10 Mar 2021, 07:19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This is definitely an interesting question - makes one wonder about small aspects with the potential to kill marriages. :)

It is a fairly easy question, as questions go. The correct answer is D.

What we know from the passage:

A study of marital relationships -
- Where one partner had a different sleeping and waking cycle as compared to his/her partner
- Observation 1: such couples share fewer activities with each other
- Observation 2: such couples had more violent fights with each other
- Both observations are in comparison with couples who follow the same sleeping and waking patterns

Conclusion being made based on the study: mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage

We need to weaken the above argument:
What new information reduces our belief in the conclusion that mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage?
Given the results of the study.

When we want to weaken a causality (A is a cause of B - Mismatched S and W cycles can be a cause of jeopardy in a marriage),

1. What if we have a statement that tells us that it is some other unrelated factor altogether which causes the effect and not the given cause? For example, maybe, it is the difference in food preferences, a factor that may have nothing to do with sleeping and waking cycles, which is the real reason. So, the results of a counter-study that indicates food preferences is the real culprit and not anything else can weaken the given argument

2. What if the causality is reversed (Instead of A being a cause of B, what if we are given that B is causing A)? A statement that indicates so would also weaken our belief in the given causality. For instance, a study which indicates that couples who have violent arguments tend to avoid each other by changing their sleeping and waking cycles. This would flip the given causality and weaken our conclusion.


This is what makes option D correct. It suggests that people in unhappy (troubled/jeopardised) marriages adopt a different sleeping and waking cycle from their spouses, to express hostility. In other words, the difference in cycles is the effect of troubled marriage, rather than the other way around, which is what our conclusion is all about.


Option A is somewhat popular.


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage

The argument firstly, nowhere claims that different cycles is the only cause for a jeopardised marriage. Couples with the same cycles can have occasional arguments, even ones that can jeopardise the marriage. So, option A at best tells us that there can be other causes too. But this does not tell us anything about whether a difference in sleeping and waking cycles between spouses, in particular is indeed a cause or not (for seriously jeopardising a marriage).


Hope this helps!
Regards,
Harsha
User avatar
PriyamRathor
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2021
Last visit: 24 May 2024
Posts: 152
Own Kudos:
119
Given Kudos: 167
Location: India
WE:Corporate Finance (Accounting)
Posts: 152
Kudos: 119
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 05 Dec 2022, 00:48
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and waking cycles differ from those of the other partner reveals that such couples share fewer activities with each other and have more violent arguments than do couples in a relationship in which both partners follow the same sleeping and waking patterns. Thus, mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

(B) The sleeping and waking cycles of individuals tend to vary from season to season.

(C) The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work.

(D) People in unhappy marriages have been found to express hostility by adopting a different sleeping and waking cycle from that of their spouses.

(E) According to a recent study, most people's sleeping and waking cycles can be controlled and modified easily.

Show more


egmat
This is definitely an interesting question - makes one wonder about small aspects with the potential to kill marriages. :)

It is a fairly easy question, as questions go. The correct answer is D.

What we know from the passage:

A study of marital relationships -
- Where one partner had a different sleeping and waking cycle as compared to his/her partner
- Observation 1: such couples share fewer activities with each other
- Observation 2: such couples had more violent fights with each other
- Both observations are in comparison with couples who follow the same sleeping and waking patterns

Conclusion being made based on the study: mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage

We need to weaken the above argument:
What new information reduces our belief in the conclusion that mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage?
Given the results of the study.

When we want to weaken a causality (A is a cause of B - Mismatched S and W cycles can be a cause of jeopardy in a marriage),

1. What if we have a statement that tells us that it is some other unrelated factor altogether which causes the effect and not the given cause? For example, maybe, it is the difference in food preferences, a factor that may have nothing to do with sleeping and waking cycles, which is the real reason. So, the results of a counter-study that indicates food preferences is the real culprit and not anything else can weaken the given argument

2. What if the causality is reversed (Instead of A being a cause of B, what if we are given that B is causing A)? A statement that indicates so would also weaken our belief in the given causality. For instance, a study which indicates that couples who have violent arguments tend to avoid each other by changing their sleeping and waking cycles. This would flip the given causality and weaken our conclusion.


This is what makes option D correct. It suggests that people in unhappy (troubled/jeopardised) marriages adopt a different sleeping and waking cycle from their spouses, to express hostility. In other words, the difference in cycles is the effect of troubled marriage, rather than the other way around, which is what our conclusion is all about.


Option A is somewhat popular.


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage

The argument firstly, nowhere claims that different cycles is the only cause for a jeopardised marriage. Couples with the same cycles can have occasional arguments, even ones that can jeopardise the marriage. So, option A at best tells us that there can be other causes too. But this does not tell us anything about whether a difference in sleeping and waking cycles between spouses, in particular is indeed a cause or not (for seriously jeopardising a marriage).


Hope this helps!
Regards,
Harsha
Show more

Hello Harsha,
egmat

Here , as you have mentioned in the post above ,the causation given is " A is the cause of B " ie

(A)mismatched sleeping and waking cycles ------------>(B)can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

So , one another way to weaken this causation is by showing when A didn't happen , B happened; Option A just does that ie

(A didn't happen) Married couples with same sleeping and waking patterns -----> (B happened) also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

Please help

Thanks
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,989
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 05 Dec 2022, 04:01
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PriyamRathor
Quote:
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and waking cycles differ from those of the other partner reveals that such couples share fewer activities with each other and have more violent arguments than do couples in a relationship in which both partners follow the same sleeping and waking patterns. Thus, mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

(B) The sleeping and waking cycles of individuals tend to vary from season to season.

(C) The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work.

(D) People in unhappy marriages have been found to express hostility by adopting a different sleeping and waking cycle from that of their spouses.

(E) According to a recent study, most people's sleeping and waking cycles can be controlled and modified easily.



egmat
This is definitely an interesting question - makes one wonder about small aspects with the potential to kill marriages. :)

It is a fairly easy question, as questions go. The correct answer is D.

What we know from the passage:

A study of marital relationships -
- Where one partner had a different sleeping and waking cycle as compared to his/her partner
- Observation 1: such couples share fewer activities with each other
- Observation 2: such couples had more violent fights with each other
- Both observations are in comparison with couples who follow the same sleeping and waking patterns

Conclusion being made based on the study: mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage

We need to weaken the above argument:
What new information reduces our belief in the conclusion that mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage?
Given the results of the study.

When we want to weaken a causality (A is a cause of B - Mismatched S and W cycles can be a cause of jeopardy in a marriage),

1. What if we have a statement that tells us that it is some other unrelated factor altogether which causes the effect and not the given cause? For example, maybe, it is the difference in food preferences, a factor that may have nothing to do with sleeping and waking cycles, which is the real reason. So, the results of a counter-study that indicates food preferences is the real culprit and not anything else can weaken the given argument

2. What if the causality is reversed (Instead of A being a cause of B, what if we are given that B is causing A)? A statement that indicates so would also weaken our belief in the given causality. For instance, a study which indicates that couples who have violent arguments tend to avoid each other by changing their sleeping and waking cycles. This would flip the given causality and weaken our conclusion.


This is what makes option D correct. It suggests that people in unhappy (troubled/jeopardised) marriages adopt a different sleeping and waking cycle from their spouses, to express hostility. In other words, the difference in cycles is the effect of troubled marriage, rather than the other way around, which is what our conclusion is all about.


Option A is somewhat popular.


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage

The argument firstly, nowhere claims that different cycles is the only cause for a jeopardised marriage. Couples with the same cycles can have occasional arguments, even ones that can jeopardise the marriage. So, option A at best tells us that there can be other causes too. But this does not tell us anything about whether a difference in sleeping and waking cycles between spouses, in particular is indeed a cause or not (for seriously jeopardising a marriage).


Hope this helps!
Regards,
Harsha

Hello Harsha,
egmat

Here , as you have mentioned in the post above ,the causation given is " A is the cause of B " ie

(A)mismatched sleeping and waking cycles ------------>(B)can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

So , one another way to weaken this causation is by showing when A didn't happen , B happened; Option A just does that ie

(A didn't happen) Married couples with same sleeping and waking patterns -----> (B happened) also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

Please help

Thanks
Show more

Observation: A and B appear together (are correlated)
Conclusion: A causes B

To weaken it, you can say 'B causes A' or you can say 'Both A and B are caused by C (a third factor)'

Here we are given 'diff sleep patterns' and 'marital discord' appear together. The conclusion is that 'diff sleep pattern' causes 'marital discord.' We can weaken it in two ways:
1. By saying that actually 'marital discord' causes 'diff sleep patterns'
2. By saying that 'some job profiles' cause 'diff sleep patterns' as well as 'marital discord due to excessive stress' etc.

Saying that 'C causes B' does not weaken 'A causes B.' The conclusion does not say that A is the only cause of B. There could be other factors causing B too.
Option (A) says that other factors can cause marital discord too. It doesn't weaken our conclusion.
User avatar
PriyamRathor
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2021
Last visit: 24 May 2024
Posts: 152
Own Kudos:
119
Given Kudos: 167
Location: India
WE:Corporate Finance (Accounting)
Posts: 152
Kudos: 119
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 05 Dec 2022, 04:38
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
PriyamRathor
Quote:
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and waking cycles differ from those of the other partner reveals that such couples share fewer activities with each other and have more violent arguments than do couples in a relationship in which both partners follow the same sleeping and waking patterns. Thus, mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

(B) The sleeping and waking cycles of individuals tend to vary from season to season.

(C) The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work.

(D) People in unhappy marriages have been found to express hostility by adopting a different sleeping and waking cycle from that of their spouses.

(E) According to a recent study, most people's sleeping and waking cycles can be controlled and modified easily.



egmat
This is definitely an interesting question - makes one wonder about small aspects with the potential to kill marriages. :)

It is a fairly easy question, as questions go. The correct answer is D.

What we know from the passage:

A study of marital relationships -
- Where one partner had a different sleeping and waking cycle as compared to his/her partner
- Observation 1: such couples share fewer activities with each other
- Observation 2: such couples had more violent fights with each other
- Both observations are in comparison with couples who follow the same sleeping and waking patterns

Conclusion being made based on the study: mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage

We need to weaken the above argument:
What new information reduces our belief in the conclusion that mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage?
Given the results of the study.

When we want to weaken a causality (A is a cause of B - Mismatched S and W cycles can be a cause of jeopardy in a marriage),

1. What if we have a statement that tells us that it is some other unrelated factor altogether which causes the effect and not the given cause? For example, maybe, it is the difference in food preferences, a factor that may have nothing to do with sleeping and waking cycles, which is the real reason. So, the results of a counter-study that indicates food preferences is the real culprit and not anything else can weaken the given argument

2. What if the causality is reversed (Instead of A being a cause of B, what if we are given that B is causing A)? A statement that indicates so would also weaken our belief in the given causality. For instance, a study which indicates that couples who have violent arguments tend to avoid each other by changing their sleeping and waking cycles. This would flip the given causality and weaken our conclusion.


This is what makes option D correct. It suggests that people in unhappy (troubled/jeopardised) marriages adopt a different sleeping and waking cycle from their spouses, to express hostility. In other words, the difference in cycles is the effect of troubled marriage, rather than the other way around, which is what our conclusion is all about.


Option A is somewhat popular.


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage

The argument firstly, nowhere claims that different cycles is the only cause for a jeopardised marriage. Couples with the same cycles can have occasional arguments, even ones that can jeopardise the marriage. So, option A at best tells us that there can be other causes too. But this does not tell us anything about whether a difference in sleeping and waking cycles between spouses, in particular is indeed a cause or not (for seriously jeopardising a marriage).


Hope this helps!
Regards,
Harsha

Hello Harsha,
egmat

Here , as you have mentioned in the post above ,the causation given is " A is the cause of B " ie

(A)mismatched sleeping and waking cycles ------------>(B)can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

So , one another way to weaken this causation is by showing when A didn't happen , B happened; Option A just does that ie

(A didn't happen) Married couples with same sleeping and waking patterns -----> (B happened) also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

Please help

Thanks

Observation: A and B appear together (are correlated)
Conclusion: A causes B

To weaken it, you can say 'B causes A' or you can say 'Both A and B are caused by C (a third factor)'

Here we are given 'diff sleep patterns' and 'marital discord' appear together. The conclusion is that 'diff sleep pattern' causes 'marital discord.' We can weaken it in two ways:
1. By saying that actually 'marital discord' causes 'diff sleep patterns'
2. By saying that 'some job profiles' cause 'diff sleep patterns' as well as 'marital discord due to excessive stress' etc.

Saying that 'C causes B' does not weaken 'A causes B.' The conclusion does not say that A is the only cause of B. There could be other factors causing B too.
Option (A) says that other factors can cause marital discord too. It doesn't weaken our conclusion.
Show more

Hi KarishmaB ,

Quote:
Saying that 'C causes B' does not weaken 'A causes B.
Show more

I agree with your point above.

But in my reasoning it's not C causes B, rather it's A didn't happen but B happened

ORIGINAL CAUSATION - mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

OPTION A - Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.


If it was given , say Married couple in which both the couples have difference of opinion also can jeopardize the couple's marriage

Then in that case I would have agreed to your opinion.

Please help

Thanks
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
 [2]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,989
 [2]
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 05 Dec 2022, 21:37
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PriyamRathor

I agree with your point above.

But in my reasoning it's not C causes B, rather it's A didn't happen but B happened

ORIGINAL CAUSATION - mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

OPTION A - Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.


If it was given , say Married couple in which both the couples have difference of opinion also can jeopardize the couple's marriage

Then in that case I would have agreed to your opinion.

Please help

Thanks
Show more

It is the same thing. The point is that 'A causes B' does not mean that B could not happen because of some other reason, any other reason or no reason.
If B happened but A did not, it does not weaken 'A causes B.' B could have happened because of some other reason (say C).
What weakens 'A causes B' is if A happened but B did not.

Take a simpler example.

Whenever I get sick (A) , my brother visits me (B).
Cause - sick (A) , Effect - visit (B)
A causes B.

My brother visited me yesterday though I was not sick yesterday.
Does it weaken the cause effect given above? No. My brother could have visited for some other reason (C) or no reason. Still, A does cause B. Something else could also cause B.
What would weaken this causation is if I get sick but my brother doesn't visit me. So if A happens but B doesn't, then the causation breaks.
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,884
 [1]
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,884
 [1]
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 06 Dec 2022, 09:19
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PriyamRathor
Quote:
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and waking cycles differ from those of the other partner reveals that such couples share fewer activities with each other and have more violent arguments than do couples in a relationship in which both partners follow the same sleeping and waking patterns. Thus, mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

(B) The sleeping and waking cycles of individuals tend to vary from season to season.

(C) The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work.

(D) People in unhappy marriages have been found to express hostility by adopting a different sleeping and waking cycle from that of their spouses.

(E) According to a recent study, most people's sleeping and waking cycles can be controlled and modified easily.



egmat
This is definitely an interesting question - makes one wonder about small aspects with the potential to kill marriages. :)

It is a fairly easy question, as questions go. The correct answer is D.

What we know from the passage:

A study of marital relationships -
- Where one partner had a different sleeping and waking cycle as compared to his/her partner
- Observation 1: such couples share fewer activities with each other
- Observation 2: such couples had more violent fights with each other
- Both observations are in comparison with couples who follow the same sleeping and waking patterns

Conclusion being made based on the study: mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage

We need to weaken the above argument:
What new information reduces our belief in the conclusion that mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage?
Given the results of the study.

When we want to weaken a causality (A is a cause of B - Mismatched S and W cycles can be a cause of jeopardy in a marriage),

1. What if we have a statement that tells us that it is some other unrelated factor altogether which causes the effect and not the given cause? For example, maybe, it is the difference in food preferences, a factor that may have nothing to do with sleeping and waking cycles, which is the real reason. So, the results of a counter-study that indicates food preferences is the real culprit and not anything else can weaken the given argument

2. What if the causality is reversed (Instead of A being a cause of B, what if we are given that B is causing A)? A statement that indicates so would also weaken our belief in the given causality. For instance, a study which indicates that couples who have violent arguments tend to avoid each other by changing their sleeping and waking cycles. This would flip the given causality and weaken our conclusion.


This is what makes option D correct. It suggests that people in unhappy (troubled/jeopardised) marriages adopt a different sleeping and waking cycle from their spouses, to express hostility. In other words, the difference in cycles is the effect of troubled marriage, rather than the other way around, which is what our conclusion is all about.


Option A is somewhat popular.


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage

The argument firstly, nowhere claims that different cycles is the only cause for a jeopardised marriage. Couples with the same cycles can have occasional arguments, even ones that can jeopardise the marriage. So, option A at best tells us that there can be other causes too. But this does not tell us anything about whether a difference in sleeping and waking cycles between spouses, in particular is indeed a cause or not (for seriously jeopardising a marriage).


Hope this helps!
Regards,
Harsha

Hello Harsha,
egmat

Here , as you have mentioned in the post above ,the causation given is " A is the cause of B " ie

(A)mismatched sleeping and waking cycles ------------>(B)can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

So , one another way to weaken this causation is by showing when A didn't happen , B happened; Option A just does that ie

(A didn't happen) Married couples with same sleeping and waking patterns -----> (B happened) also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

Please help

Thanks
Show more

Hi PriyamRathor,

Thanks for reaching out!

I made this video to try and help with this query.

Hope it helps!
Harsha
User avatar
PriyamRathor
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2021
Last visit: 24 May 2024
Posts: 152
Own Kudos:
119
Given Kudos: 167
Location: India
WE:Corporate Finance (Accounting)
Posts: 152
Kudos: 119
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 07 Dec 2022, 06:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
egmat
PriyamRathor
Quote:
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and waking cycles differ from those of the other partner reveals that such couples share fewer activities with each other and have more violent arguments than do couples in a relationship in which both partners follow the same sleeping and waking patterns. Thus, mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

(B) The sleeping and waking cycles of individuals tend to vary from season to season.

(C) The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work.

(D) People in unhappy marriages have been found to express hostility by adopting a different sleeping and waking cycle from that of their spouses.

(E) According to a recent study, most people's sleeping and waking cycles can be controlled and modified easily.



egmat
This is definitely an interesting question - makes one wonder about small aspects with the potential to kill marriages. :)

It is a fairly easy question, as questions go. The correct answer is D.

What we know from the passage:

A study of marital relationships -
- Where one partner had a different sleeping and waking cycle as compared to his/her partner
- Observation 1: such couples share fewer activities with each other
- Observation 2: such couples had more violent fights with each other
- Both observations are in comparison with couples who follow the same sleeping and waking patterns

Conclusion being made based on the study: mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage

We need to weaken the above argument:
What new information reduces our belief in the conclusion that mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage?
Given the results of the study.

When we want to weaken a causality (A is a cause of B - Mismatched S and W cycles can be a cause of jeopardy in a marriage),

1. What if we have a statement that tells us that it is some other unrelated factor altogether which causes the effect and not the given cause? For example, maybe, it is the difference in food preferences, a factor that may have nothing to do with sleeping and waking cycles, which is the real reason. So, the results of a counter-study that indicates food preferences is the real culprit and not anything else can weaken the given argument

2. What if the causality is reversed (Instead of A being a cause of B, what if we are given that B is causing A)? A statement that indicates so would also weaken our belief in the given causality. For instance, a study which indicates that couples who have violent arguments tend to avoid each other by changing their sleeping and waking cycles. This would flip the given causality and weaken our conclusion.


This is what makes option D correct. It suggests that people in unhappy (troubled/jeopardised) marriages adopt a different sleeping and waking cycle from their spouses, to express hostility. In other words, the difference in cycles is the effect of troubled marriage, rather than the other way around, which is what our conclusion is all about.


Option A is somewhat popular.


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage

The argument firstly, nowhere claims that different cycles is the only cause for a jeopardised marriage. Couples with the same cycles can have occasional arguments, even ones that can jeopardise the marriage. So, option A at best tells us that there can be other causes too. But this does not tell us anything about whether a difference in sleeping and waking cycles between spouses, in particular is indeed a cause or not (for seriously jeopardising a marriage).


Hope this helps!
Regards,
Harsha

Hello Harsha,
egmat

Here , as you have mentioned in the post above ,the causation given is " A is the cause of B " ie

(A)mismatched sleeping and waking cycles ------------>(B)can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

So , one another way to weaken this causation is by showing when A didn't happen , B happened; Option A just does that ie

(A didn't happen) Married couples with same sleeping and waking patterns -----> (B happened) also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

Please help

Thanks

Hi PriyamRathor,

Thanks for reaching out!

I made this video to try and help with this query.

Hope it helps!
Harsha
Show more
Quote:

It is the same thing. The point is that 'A causes B' does not mean that B could not happen because of some other reason, any other reason or no reason.
If B happened but A did not, it does not weaken 'A causes B.' B could have happened because of some other reason (say C).
What weakens 'A causes B' is if A happened but B did not.

Take a simpler example.

Whenever I get sick (A) , my brother visits me (B).
Cause - sick (A) , Effect - visit (B)
A causes B.

My brother visited me yesterday though I was not sick yesterday.
Does it weaken the cause effect given above? No. My brother could have visited for some other reason (C) or no reason. Still, A does cause B. Something else could also cause B.
What would weaken this causation is if I get sick but my brother doesn't visit me. So if A happens but B doesn't, then the causation breaks.
_________________
Karishma
Owner of Angles and Arguments

Check out my Blog Posts here: Blog

For Individual GMAT Study Modules, check Study Modules
For Private Tutoring, check Private Tutoring
Show more

Hello Harsha egmat and KarishmaB ,

I get the point that :-

A can cause B or A causes B cannot be weakened by saying when A didn't happen , B happened

But, while solving the below OG question I came across the causality (When A didn't happen , B happened) which confused me.
Please help to resolve my doubt whether we can use the causality When A didn't happen , B happened to weaken A causes B.

I am really confused :dazed :dazed

Quote:
It is true of both men and women that those who marry as young adults live longer than those who never marry. This does not show that marriage causes people to live longer, since, as compared with other people of the same age, young adults who are about to get married have fewer of the unhealthy habits that can cause a person to have a shorter life, most notably smoking and immoderate drinking of alcohol.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument above?


(A) Marriage tends to cause people to engage less regularly in sports that involve risk of bodily harm.

(B) A married person who has an unhealthy habit is more likely to give up that habit than a person with the same habit who is unmarried.

(C) A person who smokes is much more likely than a nonsmoker to marry a person who smokes at the time of marriage, and the same is true for people who drink alcohol immoderately.

(D) Among people who marry as young adults, most of those who give up an unhealthy habit after marriage do not resume the habit later in life.

(E) Among people who as young adults neither drink alcohol immoderately nor smoke, those who never marry live as long as those who marry.
Show more

Given-
Marriage causes people to live longer

ie (A) Marriage ---------> (B) Live longer

A causes B

Author is saying that this causality is not true , and we need to strengthen the author's argument .

So , one way to strengthen authors argument is by weakening the causality.

Correct Answer ie Option E follows the structure ,
when A didn't happen , B happened

(E) Among people who as young adults neither drink alcohol immoderately nor smoke, those who never marry live as long as those who marry.

(A didn't happen) Never marry ---------> (B happened) Live Longer.

Please help. :please: :please:
Regards.

LINK - https://gmatclub.com/forum/it-is-true-of-both-men-and-women-that-those-who-marry-as-young-adults-209891.html
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,989
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 07 Dec 2022, 20:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PriyamRathor


It is true of both men and women that those who marry as young adults live longer than those who never marry. This does not show that marriage causes people to live longer, since, as compared with other people of the same age, young adults who are about to get married have fewer of the unhealthy habits that can cause a person to have a shorter life, most notably smoking and immoderate drinking of alcohol.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument above?


(A) Marriage tends to cause people to engage less regularly in sports that involve risk of bodily harm.

(B) A married person who has an unhealthy habit is more likely to give up that habit than a person with the same habit who is unmarried.

(C) A person who smokes is much more likely than a nonsmoker to marry a person who smokes at the time of marriage, and the same is true for people who drink alcohol immoderately.

(D) Among people who marry as young adults, most of those who give up an unhealthy habit after marriage do not resume the habit later in life.

(E) Among people who as young adults neither drink alcohol immoderately nor smoke, those who never marry live as long as those who marry.

Given-
Marriage causes people to live longer

ie (A) Marriage ---------> (B) Live longer

A causes B

Author is saying that this causality is not true , and we need to strengthen the author's argument .

So , one way to strengthen authors argument is by weakening the causality.

Correct Answer ie Option E follows the structure ,
when A didn't happen , B happened

(E) Among people who as young adults neither drink alcohol immoderately nor smoke, those who never marry live as long as those who marry.

(A didn't happen) Never marry ---------> (B happened) Live Longer.

Please help. :please: :please:
Regards.

LINK - https://gmatclub.com/forum/it-is-true-of-both-men-and-women-that-those-who-marry-as-young-adults-209891.html
Show more

This argument says that married people have longer lives but it is because they have fewer bad habits. So the reason for longer life is fewer bad habits, not marriage. The point is - 'marriage has no connection to longer life; fewer bad habits do'
When we want to strengthen the argument above, we need to show that 'fewer bad habits' is actually linked to 'longer life' while marriage is irrelevant.
That is done by option (E)

Note that we don't have to weaken 'marriage causes people to live longer.' If we had to weaken this, we could NOT have done it by just saying 'people with fewer bad habits live longer too.'

We have to strengthen that 'marriage has no relation to long life.' Option (E) tells us that unmarried people also live as long as married people. Then obviously marriage has no link to long life.
User avatar
stackskillz
User avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2022
Last visit: 11 Jul 2025
Posts: 62
Own Kudos:
13
Given Kudos: 165
Posts: 62
Kudos: 13
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 30 Mar 2024, 05:05
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Conclusion: Mismatched sleeping cycles causes more marriage problems than non-mismatched sleeping cycles.
Type: Weaken

(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage. This can co-exist with the conclusion of the passage. However, we need an answer that weakens the passage. Drop

(B) The sleeping and waking cycles of individuals tend to vary from season to season. Explains probable reason for change in sleeping cycles but not mismatch of sleeping cycles causing problems. Drop

(C) The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work. Talks about  impact of sleeping cycles outside of marriage. Not relevant. Drop.

(D) People in unhappy marriages have been found to express hostility by adopting a different sleeping and waking cycle from that of their spouses. Shows that it's actually unhappy marriages, i.e., another cause or the marriage itself, i.e, reversal of the cause-effect relationship leading to the mismatched sleep cycles in partners. This defintely weakens the conclusion. Keep 

(E) According to a recent study, most people's sleeping and waking cycles can be controlled and modified easily. - Feasibility of modifiing sleep cycle could help in resolving issues, but doesn't explain cause-effect link. Drop
User avatar
rushimehta
User avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 47
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 68
Location: India
Schools: Tuck '27 Ross '27 Fuqua '27
GPA: 3.78
Schools: Tuck '27 Ross '27 Fuqua '27
Posts: 47
Kudos: 3
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 07 Jul 2025, 07:58
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
PriyamRathor
Quote:
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and waking cycles differ from those of the other partner reveals that such couples share fewer activities with each other and have more violent arguments than do couples in a relationship in which both partners follow the same sleeping and waking patterns. Thus, mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

(B) The sleeping and waking cycles of individuals tend to vary from season to season.

(C) The individuals who have sleeping and waking cycles that differ significantly from those of their spouses tend to argue little with colleagues at work.

(D) People in unhappy marriages have been found to express hostility by adopting a different sleeping and waking cycle from that of their spouses.

(E) According to a recent study, most people's sleeping and waking cycles can be controlled and modified easily.



egmat
This is definitely an interesting question - makes one wonder about small aspects with the potential to kill marriages. :)

It is a fairly easy question, as questions go. The correct answer is D.

What we know from the passage:

A study of marital relationships -
- Where one partner had a different sleeping and waking cycle as compared to his/her partner
- Observation 1: such couples share fewer activities with each other
- Observation 2: such couples had more violent fights with each other
- Both observations are in comparison with couples who follow the same sleeping and waking patterns

Conclusion being made based on the study: mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage

We need to weaken the above argument:
What new information reduces our belief in the conclusion that mismatched sleeping and waking cycles between a couple can seriously jeopardise a marriage?
Given the results of the study.

When we want to weaken a causality (A is a cause of B - Mismatched S and W cycles can be a cause of jeopardy in a marriage),

1. What if we have a statement that tells us that it is some other unrelated factor altogether which causes the effect and not the given cause? For example, maybe, it is the difference in food preferences, a factor that may have nothing to do with sleeping and waking cycles, which is the real reason. So, the results of a counter-study that indicates food preferences is the real culprit and not anything else can weaken the given argument

2. What if the causality is reversed (Instead of A being a cause of B, what if we are given that B is causing A)? A statement that indicates so would also weaken our belief in the given causality. For instance, a study which indicates that couples who have violent arguments tend to avoid each other by changing their sleeping and waking cycles. This would flip the given causality and weaken our conclusion.


This is what makes option D correct. It suggests that people in unhappy (troubled/jeopardised) marriages adopt a different sleeping and waking cycle from their spouses, to express hostility. In other words, the difference in cycles is the effect of troubled marriage, rather than the other way around, which is what our conclusion is all about.


Option A is somewhat popular.


(A) Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage

The argument firstly, nowhere claims that different cycles is the only cause for a jeopardised marriage. Couples with the same cycles can have occasional arguments, even ones that can jeopardise the marriage. So, option A at best tells us that there can be other causes too. But this does not tell us anything about whether a difference in sleeping and waking cycles between spouses, in particular is indeed a cause or not (for seriously jeopardising a marriage).


Hope this helps!
Regards,
Harsha

Hello Harsha,
egmat

Here , as you have mentioned in the post above ,the causation given is " A is the cause of B " ie

(A)mismatched sleeping and waking cycles ------------>(B)can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

So , one another way to weaken this causation is by showing when A didn't happen , B happened; Option A just does that ie

(A didn't happen) Married couples with same sleeping and waking patterns -----> (B happened) also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.

Please help

Thanks

Observation: A and B appear together (are correlated)
Conclusion: A causes B

To weaken it, you can say 'B causes A' or you can say 'Both A and B are caused by C (a third factor)'

Here we are given 'diff sleep patterns' and 'marital discord' appear together. The conclusion is that 'diff sleep pattern' causes 'marital discord.' We can weaken it in two ways:
1. By saying that actually 'marital discord' causes 'diff sleep patterns'
2. By saying that 'some job profiles' cause 'diff sleep patterns' as well as 'marital discord due to excessive stress' etc.

Saying that 'C causes B' does not weaken 'A causes B.' The conclusion does not say that A is the only cause of B. There could be other factors causing B too.
Option (A) says that other factors can cause marital discord too. It doesn't weaken our conclusion.
Show more
Hi KarishmaB, MartyMurray, egmat

I do understand the logic here.

A causes B is a sufficient condition, and hence we can't weaken it by saying that there's an alternate cause for B...

You mentioned "To weaken it, you can say 'B causes A' or you can say 'Both A and B are caused by C (a third factor)'"

I understand that we can weaken it by saying 'B causes A'...

But, I don't understand how we can weaken it by saying 'Both A and B are caused by C (a third factor)', isn't this the same as saying that there is an alternate cause for B ? (C is the alternate cause for B)... (and we can't weaken B by saying that we have an alternate cause)

Let me know if my thought process is not correct.
User avatar
rushimehta
User avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 47
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 68
Location: India
Schools: Tuck '27 Ross '27 Fuqua '27
GPA: 3.78
Schools: Tuck '27 Ross '27 Fuqua '27
Posts: 47
Kudos: 3
A study of marital relationships in which one partner's sleeping and 07 Jul 2025, 20:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
PriyamRathor

I agree with your point above.

But in my reasoning it's not C causes B, rather it's A didn't happen but B happened

ORIGINAL CAUSATION - mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage.

OPTION A - Married couples in which both spouses follow the same sleeping and waking patterns also occasionally have arguments that can jeopardize the couple's marriage.


If it was given , say Married couple in which both the couples have difference of opinion also can jeopardize the couple's marriage

Then in that case I would have agreed to your opinion.

Please help

Thanks

It is the same thing. The point is that 'A causes B' does not mean that B could not happen because of some other reason, any other reason or no reason.
If B happened but A did not, it does not weaken 'A causes B.' B could have happened because of some other reason (say C).
What weakens 'A causes B' is if A happened but B did not.

Take a simpler example.

Whenever I get sick (A) , my brother visits me (B).
Cause - sick (A) , Effect - visit (B)
A causes B.

My brother visited me yesterday though I was not sick yesterday.
Does it weaken the cause effect given above? No. My brother could have visited for some other reason (C) or no reason. Still, A does cause B. Something else could also cause B.
What would weaken this causation is if I get sick but my brother doesn't visit me. So if A happens but B doesn't, then the causation breaks.
Show more

Hi KarishmaB, MartyMurray,

In the above example, I understand how if A happens but B doesn't, then the causation breaks, and the statement is weakened.

But, In the actual question, the conclusion says "Thus, mismatched sleeping and waking cycles can seriously jeopardize a marriage."

It has "can"... and can doesn't [color=#001d35]necessarily mean 100% certainty...
So how can we say for sure that If A (mismatched sleeping and waking cycles) happens, then B (jeopardize a marriage) will definitely happen ?
If we can't be sure that every time A happens, then B will happen ... then how can the above conclusion get weakened by saying that A happened, but B doesn't happen.

I don't know whether I am looking too much into the statements, wordings and formation... but at the end of the day I feel these small things do matter in GMAT and it can change the meaning of the statement entirely...

Please let me know if I am going wrong in my thought process.

Thank you in advance! :) [/color]
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts