Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 04:15 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 04:15
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
 [1]
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
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
russ9
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Last visit: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 174
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 23
Posts: 174
Kudos: 400
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
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
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
naval.sheth@gmail.com
Joined: 23 Nov 2013
Last visit: 02 Jun 2021
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 534
Posts: 8
Kudos: 3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Still another doubt with D , please explain this..

Lets Negate D

Most parents would NOT refuse to purchase video games for their adolescent children.

What if I go with this thinking ....

Even if parents would NOT refuse to purchase video games and infact buy the video games for their child , Still there are chances that adolescent themself or their siblings might stop the adolescent to play video game hearing the ban.

Now though D is negated still conclusion does not breaks apart. ie Federal legislation that prohibits the sale of video games is still helping minors to curb this painful wrist condition among adolescents.
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
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
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
naval.sheth@gmail.com
Still another doubt with D , please explain this..

Lets Negate D

Most parents would NOT refuse to purchase video games for their adolescent children.

What if I go with this thinking ....

Even if parents would NOT refuse to purchase video games and infact buy the video games for their child , Still there are chances that adolescent themself or their siblings might stop the adolescent to play video game hearing the ban.

Now though D is negated still conclusion does not breaks apart. ie Federal legislation that prohibits the sale of video games is still helping minors to curb this painful wrist condition among adolescents.

The doctor feels that if adolescents do not have video games to play, it will help curb the condition. But the law only bans minors from buying it. The law will have effect only if minors do not get their hands on the video games if they are not allowed to buy them. If adults buy the games for them instead, then the law is useless. It doesn't make sense for adults to buy the games for them and then not allow them to play. Also, why would the adults buy the games for them if adolescents themselves do not want to play. I will not say that this can never happen, but it sure would be rare. Only if adolescents want the games and adults will allow them to play will the adults buy the games. Hence, if you negate (D), the conclusion does fall apart.
avatar
aelfatmaoui
Joined: 02 Jun 2014
Last visit: 07 Feb 2015
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
2
 [2]
Posts: 1
Kudos: 2
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I have seen similar GMAT questions like this one many times; it looks like the GMAT wants us to distinguish between what the law says and what people actually do. as in this example, the law is prohibiting certain action, but the conclusion went as far as to conclude that the regulations will prevent the happening of the action. well, if the laws by themselves were capable of stopping people from doing bad things, we wouldn't need courts or jails...
User avatar
sayantanc2k
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Last visit: 09 Dec 2022
Posts: 2,393
Own Kudos:
15,523
 [8]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Expert
Expert reply
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
Posts: 2,393
Kudos: 15,523
 [8]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sushbis
Why not C? Here the author says "prohibits the sale of video games to minors would help curb this painful wrist condition among adolescents. " Doesnt he assume here that the only cause for wrist condition is playing video games. If that is not the only cause, then this legislation will not have its intended effect.

"Curb" means restrain or control, not "eradicate". Your point could be valid if the wording were as follows:

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

Even if there were other reasons for the syndrome, restricting video games would still curb or restrain the syndrome (among those who play videos games).
avatar
Shiv2016
Joined: 02 Sep 2016
Last visit: 14 Aug 2024
Posts: 516
Own Kudos:
211
 [3]
Given Kudos: 277
Posts: 516
Kudos: 211
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Adolescents play video games regularly and thus are likely to develop some syndrome.
By prohibiting the sale to the MINORS would help curb this issue.

The assumption here is that these minors would not come in contact with the video games by any means. What if someone else buys for them or gift them? Then the argument fails.
Therefore correct choice would be one that states that there is no other way for these minors to come in contact with video games.
Choice D is correct as it states MOST (majority) of parents won’t buy video games for their adolescent children.
avatar
hwang327
Joined: 05 Jun 2016
Last visit: 08 Aug 2019
Posts: 19
Own Kudos:
70
 [2]
Given Kudos: 3
GMAT 1: 760 Q51 V41
Products:
GMAT 1: 760 Q51 V41
Posts: 19
Kudos: 70
 [2]
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here is my take.

• The majority of federal legislators would vote for a bill that prohibits the sale of video games to minors.
- The conclusion is a CAUSE AND EFFECT conclusion which states that IF game sales to minors are banned, kids are less likely to develop the carpel tunnel. A is one of the generic tricks on these type of cause-and-effect conclusion question. A tries to mislead you by making you think the IF condition is likely to happen. However, even if the law isn't passed, the conclusion that - if it were implemented, it would work - is still valid.

• Not all adolescents who play video games on a regular basis suffer from carpal tunnel syndrome.
We don't need all regular kids gamers to develop carpal tunnel to establish the argument that gaming could lead to a degree of carpel tunnel and that if such gaming is limited, less carpel tunnel could result.

• Playing video games is the only way an adolescent can develop carpal tunnel syndrome.
Not necessary. Kids could develop carpal tunnel from eating ice-cream or staring at the sun for all we care. It still doesn't affect the argument that since kids develop carpal tunnel from games, by preventing gaming, carpal tunnel could be limited from this specific activity. So even if kids could develop carpal tunnel from 1 million activities, by limiting one of such activities, you could still reduce carpal tunnel by a bit...

• Most parents would refuse to purchase video games for their adolescent children. (Correct)
If kids aren't allowed to buy video games, but their parents could buy it for them, then the end result is the same ... kids are still time playing games as before... and the intended effect of passing the law - limiting kids from playing games - is negated as parents are helping their kids to by-pass the ban.

• The regular playing of video games by adolescents does not produce such beneficial effects as better hand-eye
coordination and improved reaction time.
The kids could develop carpal tunnel and at the same time, all become Einsteiens for all we care. It still doesn't affect the argument that since games lead to carpal tunnel, limiting gaming could reduce carpal tunnel. We don't care about other effects of gaming...

Hope that helps
User avatar
Deep32470
Joined: 06 Apr 2023
Last visit: 12 Sep 2023
Posts: 85
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 283
Location: India
Posts: 85
Kudos: 4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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?


(A) The majority of federal legislators would vote for a bill that prohibits the sale of video games to minors.

(B) Not all adolescents who play video games on a regular basis suffer from carpal tunnel syndrome.

(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.

(E) The regular playing of video games by adolescents does not produce such beneficial effects as better hand-eye coordination and improved reaction time.

The law would prohibit sale of video games to minors. But parents can buy it for their kids.
Hence D

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
Reeshik
Joined: 13 Mar 2023
Last visit: 18 May 2025
Posts: 3
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 3
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
i am not able to eliminate option A,

Here is my reasoning - If the bill that is related to prohibiton of sales of video games will not pass, then whole conclusion of the doctor will be wrong , correct me if i am wrong
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,832
Own Kudos:
Posts: 18,832
Kudos: 986
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
188 posts