It is currently 18 Jan 2018, 12:05

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Doctor: Research shows that adolescents who play video games

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 30 Jun 2017
Posts: 25

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 62

### Show Tags

29 Jul 2017, 23:57
I marked C in the first go. However, it now looks irrelevant, considering the conclusion of the premise.

Consider this-
Before the legislation comes in effect, shopkeepers must be selling the video games to the adolescents directly. But once the legislation comes into play, adolescents cannot directly buy the games. But, what if the parents (who are not adolescents) go and buy the games for their children. This would not involve going against the ruling/legislation. Hence, the argument assumes, that yes no parents would buy games for their children. If the parents are convinced not to buy the video games, then the legislation would have its desired effect.

This makes D the correct choice.

Hope my reasoning helps.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 62

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10263

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

18 Sep 2017, 09:41
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 287 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 57

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2017, 22:38
amit2k9 wrote:
Assumption : type Supporter
Test : Negation. (should weaken the conclusion)
POE : A,D prevail

D :Most parents would not refuse to purchase video games for their adolescent children.

Dosen't seem to affect the conclusion which states about legislators.
A: The majority of federal legislators would not vote for a bill that prohibits the sale of video games to minors.

Legislation won't pass.Hence weaken.
Clear choice A.
thank you

Can u pls elaborate on this??
Why is A not the correct answer?

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 57

Intern
Joined: 10 Feb 2016
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 57

### Show Tags

25 Sep 2017, 19:34
A. The doctor doesn't know whether a bill would be passed. So, this is not an assumption.
D. If Federal Legislation prohibits sale to minors, the end result would only be achieved if the parents wouldn't buy video games for their adolescent children.

Hence D.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 57

Intern
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 12

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2017, 07:49
Is my understanding of the premise correct?

Given: Research shows that adolescents who play video games on a regular basis are three times as likely to develop carpal tunnel syndrome as are adolescents who do not play video games.

My understanding: Adolescents who play video games are more vulnerable (3X times) to get a particular syndrome compared to those adolescents who do not play (X times). So, is it correct to say that adolescents who play and those who do not play are both vulnerable to get the syndrome?

Conclusion: Federal legislation that prohibits the sale of video games to minors would help curb this painful wrist condition among adolescents.

My understanding: If prohibiting the sale of video games helps to control the situation among adolescents then based on the comparison (3X vs X) how will such prohibition helps to control the situation among adolescents who do not Play the video games?

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 10

Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Mar 2017
Posts: 310

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 504

Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Organizational Behavior
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2017, 04:12
Doctor: Research shows that adolescents who play video games on a regular basis are three times as likely to develop carpal tunnel syndrome as are adolescents who do not play video games. Federal legislation that prohibits the sale of video games to minors would help curb this painful wrist condition among adolescents.

The doctor’s conclusion depends on which of the following assumptions?

(C) Playing video games is the only way an adolescent can develop carpal tunnel syndrome.
(D) Most parents would refuse to purchase video games for their adolescent children.

Good Question. C and D are contenders. Since the conclusion talks about only curbing the issue based on the new rule, C can be ruled out.
--D--
_________________

------------------------------
"Trust the timing of your life"
Hit Kudus if this has helped you get closer to your goal, and also to assist others save time. Tq

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 504

Re: Doctor: Research shows that adolescents who play video games   [#permalink] 12 Dec 2017, 04:12

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   [ 166 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Doctor: Research shows that adolescents who play video games

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.