Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 11:38 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 11:38
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   3   4 
User avatar
san10789
User avatar
Joined: 29 Apr 2021
Last visit: 02 Apr 2024
Posts: 49
Own Kudos:
23
Given Kudos: 75
Location: India
Concentration: Leadership, Technology
Schools: IIML IPMX'25 (A)
GMAT 1: 640 Q47 V31
GPA: 4
Schools: IIML IPMX'25 (A)
GMAT 1: 640 Q47 V31
Posts: 49
Kudos: 23
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly les 09 Oct 2022, 00:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
humtum0
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week.


(A) chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week

(B) chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week

(C) chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997

(D) chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997

(E) chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997


Show Spoiler
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/11/11/us/children-study-longer-and-play-less-a-report-says.html

Children age 3 to 11 years of age spent on average four hours a day in preschool or school in the early 1980's and now spend an average of six hours a day in preschool or school. The 1981 study reported that children spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores. By 1997, the year the field research was conducted, that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week.
Show more

1.Could not strike any option on Grammar rules
2. Read the whole sentence for meaning and logic
What I understood - Something used to happen in 1981, which continued and grew till 1997.
- Eliminated option C D E - for not using "by 1997"
Between A and B,
A uses - they had spent - didn't make sense to me.
B uses - "the figure had grown to " - talks something about grown - 3 to 6 hours . - Fits Logic - as last option marked it.
User avatar
Rickooreo
User avatar
Joined: 24 Dec 2021
Last visit: 15 Feb 2023
Posts: 302
Own Kudos:
30
Given Kudos: 240
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Schools: ISB '24 Moore '25
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V35
GPA: 3.95
WE:Real Estate (Consulting)
Schools: ISB '24 Moore '25
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V35
Posts: 302
Kudos: 30
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly les 05 Nov 2022, 21:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can someone please provide complete analysis of this official SC. Also, how to understand whether independent clause construction will be better or one clause with subordinating conjunction.
I thought that since the intended meaning of the question is to make comparison between two period, it should be one sentence and not two different sentence, just as
A is smarter than B
A is smart. B is not as smart as A.
User avatar
RonTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 19 Jul 2022
Last visit: 07 Nov 2022
Posts: 430
Own Kudos:
537
 [3]
Given Kudos: 1
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 430
Kudos: 537
 [3]
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly les 07 Nov 2022, 01:59
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Rickooreo
I thought that since the intended meaning of the question is to make comparison between two period, it should be one sentence and not two different sentence, just as
A is smarter than B
A is smart. B is not as smart as A.
Show more

This judgment, like all other judgments about the message / intended meaning of a sentence, needs to be informed by the actual content of the sentence.

In this case, it's plain at a glance that the sentence provides two specific statistics, one for each timeframe cited. This means that the sentence CAN'T be phrased in terms of a comparative (-er form, like "smarter" in your example).

Instead, there are two types of ways in which these kinds of sentences (with two quantitative specifics, between which the intended comparison is implied and left to the reader to infer) are most often written:
• As two altogether separate clauses—linked by a semicolon, so as to link them into what's still technically a single larger sentence (since SC conventions prohibit having more than one sentence in a single problem);
OR
• With "[statistic], (as) compared to/with [other statistic]".

The latter construction does, by the way, require that "compared to/with" be followed directly by the second statistic. So, e.g., the construction of choice D is incorrect here; we'd need "compared with nearly 6 hours..." (not "compared with a figure of nearly 6 hours...").
User avatar
JOSH1967
User avatar
Joined: 28 May 2020
Last visit: 02 Aug 2025
Posts: 6
Given Kudos: 7
Posts: 6
Kudos: 0
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly les 12 Nov 2022, 03:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
@Gmatninja@MartyTargetTestPrep

could you please throw some light on whether the usage of "by 1997" without a comma following the phrase is appropriate? Shouldn't it be " By 1997, that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week"?
User avatar
BansalT
User avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2022
Last visit: 23 Aug 2023
Posts: 43
Own Kudos:
5
Given Kudos: 52
Posts: 43
Kudos: 5
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly les 12 Nov 2022, 04:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can Expert's Global, GMATNinja or EmpowerGmat provide detailed explanation on this?
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,786
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,786
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly les 18 Nov 2022, 13:07
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
JOSH1967
@Gmatninja@MartyTargetTestPrep

could you please throw some light on whether the usage of "by 1997" without a comma following the phrase is appropriate? Shouldn't it be " By 1997, that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week"?
Show more
The GMAT is generally pretty lenient when it comes to comma usage, so you're better off being conservative with this sort of thing. In other words: if you're not 100% sure that the comma is a problem, look for other decision points. In this case, the sentence would be fine with or without the comma.

For more on GMAT punctuation, check out this older video or this newer one.
User avatar
Raman109
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Jul 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
170
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 805
Kudos: 170
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly les 15 Nov 2023, 16:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In 1981 children in the United States spent an average of slightly less than two and a half hours a week doing household chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week.

Option Elimination -

(A) chores; by 1997 they had spent nearly six hours a week - "they," as Daagh and others mentioned, refers to the same children. The intended meaning is that children, on average, spend less than 2.5 hours a week, and by 1997, that figure had grown to nearly 6 hours a week. Moreover, "had grown" means that by 1997, they had spent 6 hours a week. Past perfect is used for actions completed in the past. So the children spent nearly 6 hours sometime between 1982 and 1996. We don't know how much they spent in 1997 - maybe 1 or 10 hours. This is a good deception. GMAT wants to ensure even when we understand the usage of past perfect; we use it in the right context. Wrong.

(B) chores; by 1997 that figure had grown to nearly six hours a week - we don't have a "they" issue here. Moreover, as now "they" are gone, we are comparing the hours spent in 1981 with the hours that had grown to nearly 6 hours sometime between 1982 and 1996

(C) chores, whereas nearly six hours a week were spent in 1997 - inferior in a shift from active to passive voice for no reason. Otherwise, there is no problem as such. I get it that, at first, it may seem we are comparing "six hours" with children, but this is also an adverbial modification of "the children spent" in the earlier clause, so logically, we can still get it that we are talking about Children. In the same context as "they," if the adverbial refers to the same children, it is a problem. Moreover, the shift is unnecessary. On GMAT SC, we need to find the best option among 5.

(D) chores, compared with a figure of nearly six hours a week in 1997 - "a figure" means any general figure, but "that figure" is better as we need to refer to the "average amount of time spent on household chores."
Compared with" is used to highlight similarities or differences between two things. The new model of the car has improved fuel efficiency compared with the previous version. As GMATNinja also pointed out, when we read that the car has improved fuel efficiency, we wonder with respect to what? Right? With respect to the previous version. But in our sentence here, if we notice the first part, "Children spent less than 2.5 hours." It's a complete thought because here, the comparison is with respect to 2.5 hours. So "compared with" is useless here and doesn't make sense.

(E) chores, that figure growing to nearly six hours a week in 1997 - "in 1997" only in this year? applicable to all options with "in 1997." Moreover, we have a noun phrase after a comma. It should modify the nearest noun, which is household chores. Wrong.
   1   2   3   4 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts