Psychological research indicates that college hockey and football play

Question

Psychological research indicates that college hockey and football players are more quickly moved to hostility and aggression than are college athletes in noncontact sports such as swimming. But the researchers’ conclusion—that contact sports encourage and teach participants to be hostile and aggressive—is untenable. The football and hockey players were probably more hostile and aggressive to start with than the swimmers.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion drawn by the psychological researchers?

(A) The football and hockey players became more hostile and aggressive during the season and remained so during the off-season, whereas there was no increase in aggressiveness among the swimmers.

(B) The football and hockey players, but not the swimmers, were aware at the start of the experiment that they were being tested for aggressiveness.

(C) The same psychological research indicated that the football and hockey players had a great respect for cooperation and team play, whereas the swimmers were most concerned with excelling as individual competitors.

(D) The research studies were designed to include no college athletes who participated in both contact and noncontact sports.

(E) Throughout the United States, more incidents of fan violence occur at baseball games than occur at hockey or football games.

KarishmaB · Accepted Answer

Research indicates that college hockey and football players are more quickly moved to hostility and aggression than are college athletes in noncontact sports such as swimming.
 Researchers’ conclusion —that contact sports encourage and teach participants to be hostile and aggressive

The football and hockey players were probably more hostile and aggressive to start with than the swimmers.
 Author's Conclusion  - The researchers conclusion is untenable.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion drawn by the psychological researchers?

We are to ignore the author's conclusion and focus only on researcher's conclusion. We need to strengthen that contact sports encourage and teach hostility and aggression.

(A) The football and hockey players became more hostile and aggressive during the season and remained so during the off-season, whereas there was no increase in aggressiveness among the swimmers.

Hostility increases during season and then stays put during off season too. Next season it would increase again and then stay at that level during off season. So it does seem to say that contact sports makes participants more hostile.

(B) The football and hockey players, but not the swimmers, were aware at the start of the experiment that they were being tested for aggressiveness.

We don't know how the players reacted to this knowledge.

(C) The same psychological research indicated that the football and hockey players had a great respect for cooperation and team play, whereas the swimmers were most concerned with excelling as individual competitors.

Irrelevant. We are discussing hostility aspect only.

(D) The research studies were designed to include no college athletes who participated in both contact and noncontact sports.

People who participate in both are irrelevant.

(E) Throughout the United States, more incidents of fan violence occur at baseball games than occur at hockey or football games.

Baseball is irrelevant.

Answer (A)

naish · Answer

'D' clarifies a significant point of contention by stating that none of the players included in study played both types of sports.
Thus, by clarifying a possible point of contention, it strengthens the issue.

Infact, 'A' which is allegedly the correct answer seems to be hurting the main conclusion. It implies that sports such as Hockey cause increase in aggression which might be carried offseason as well. whereas, the main point of the stimulus is, people who are aggressive to begin with, take up sports such as hockey. :?:

bakfed · Answer

I went with (A). We're asked to strenghthen the psychologist's conclusion, which is some sport will prompt aggressiveness while other sports don't.

(A) shows that football and hockey does prompt that agressiveness since the players remained aggressive even after the season.

(C) talks about the respect that players have for teamplay and cooperation; this, to me, is irrelanvant in terms of how we can strenghthen the conclusion made by the psychologists.

GMATT75 · Answer

If I am not wrong, the red line portion marked above is the conclusion and we are asked to strengthen that one. that is why the correct answer should be A, which strengthen the conclusion..

jlgdr · Answer

Conclusion: The researchers’ conclusion—that contact sports encourage and teach participants to be hostile and aggressive—is untenable Premise: The football and hockey players were probably more hostile and aggressive to start with than the swimmers. We want to strengthen the conclusion that college hockey and football players are more quickly moved to hostility and aggression than are college athletes in noncontact sports such as swimming In other words, we want to strengthen the claim that hockey/football make people more aggressive So let's check out our AC. (A) The football and hockey players became more hostile and aggressive during the season and remained so during the off-season, whereas there was no increase in aggressiveness among the swimmers.---> Could be, its saying that people are aggressive whether they are playing or not. But, still we don't really know if this was something caused by the sport or not. (B) The football and hockey players, but not the swimmers, were aware at the start of the experiment that they were being tested for aggressiveness. --> Out of scope (C) The same psychological research indicated that the football and hockey players had a great respect for cooperation and team play, whereas the swimmers were most concerned with excelling as individual competitors.--> Doesn't say much, in any case it would say something like swimmers are in fact more agressive than the other guys. I don't really feel that confortable with this answer. (D) The research studies were designed to include no college athletes who participated in both contact and noncontact sports.---> Out of scope (E) Throughout the United States, more incidents of fan violence occur at baseball games than occur at hockey or football games---> Out of scope Final veredict: While I don't really like any of the answer choices, I suspect that A could be the right one because it is closest to what we need to strengthen. If anyone comes up with any additional clues on this question please let me know and I'll throw some Kudos! Hope it helps Cheers! J

gmatprav · Answer

Definite A.

We are asked to strengthen the conclusion drawn by psychological researchers not the author of this CR.
Conclusion:  Contact sports encourage and teach participants to be hostile and aggressive

TheUnicorn · Answer

GMATNinja . I got the question right, but I have below query.

Given the conclusion -

Does Option D act as Weakener?

Because, this option raise doubt over researcher's study itself that the sample of the studies could be convenient for the conclusion. Is my understanding correct?

GMATNinja · Answer

It is really hard to say how (D) would impact the researchers' conclusion. The researchers believe that contact sports "encourage and teach" hostile behavior based on the fact that students involved in contact sports are more quickly moved to hostility than are their classmates who play non-contact sports. (D) tells us that the study didn't include students who participate in both types of sports. This really doesn't impact the data from the study that WAS conducted -- there is still a difference between the levels of hostility exhibited by the two groups of students that were studied. For the same reason, it also doesn't impact the researchers' conclusion that contact sports CAUSE hostile behavior. Simply put, without more information we can't say how (D) affects the researchers' conclusion. We can say with certainty that it doesn't STRENGTHEN the conclusion, which is enough to answer the question. Anything beyond that is time better spent on the next question.

I hope that helps!

mSKR · Answer

If D option were:

(D) The research studies were designed to include  NO  college athletes who participated in both contact and noncontact sports.

Can D be a strengthener?

My Reasoning: 
If a same person is in Football and Swimming, He becomes more aggressive while playing football than playing swimming. It means that it is because of sports that games have an affect on individual.

VeritasKarishma  Ma'm  GMATNinja  : please give your opinions.

KarishmaB · Answer

What the research did show was that football and hockey players were more aggressive than swimmers. Whether researchers included people who played both and if yes, how did they evaluate them is irrelevant. We don't know whether the same person becomes more aggressive while playing football and not while swimming. The point is that the people who play football were found to be more aggressive generally (even while not playing).

Kavicogsci · Answer

AjiteshArun   KarishmaB   MartyMurray  purely selected out of elimination

Here is why A could be faulty - i could make a case either way!

On season vs off season their behaviour remained same - if the problem was sports and not their own attitudes shouldn't there have been a change in behaviour in off season vs during season - off season the sport becomes less aggressive so there should be a drop in overall aggressiveness?

Scenario 1: Problem is their attitude
When they are playing during season - their own attitude leads to increase in aggressiveness but swimmers are able to keep calm.

Scenario 2: Problem is contact supports
When they are playing - aggressiveness 'increases' is clearly mentioned. What might cause this increase - sports. But swimming is less aggressive sport so no increase in aggressiveness.

MartyMurray · Answer

It's true that they remained aggressive during the offseason, but the key fact is that " The football and hockey players  became more hostile and aggressive during the season  ... whereas there was no increase in aggressiveness among the swimmers.

That difference tends to indicate the participation in those sports resulted in aggressiveness. 
 
Their attitudes could indeed be the cause of the increased aggressiveness.

At the same time, we have no reason to believe that football and hockey players' attitudes are different from swimmers' or that their attitudes are the cause.
 
Here's the thing. The correct answer to a Strengthen question doesn't have to prove the conclusion correct. I has only to provide information that is an additional reason to believe that the conclusion is likely correct.

In this case, while many factors could have caused the increase in aggressiveness, the fact that the football and hockey players became more aggressive during the season while the swimmers did not provides at least some support for the conclusion.

Thus, (A) is the correct answer that strengthens the case for the researchers' conclusion.

Psychological research indicates that college hockey and football play

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Psychological research indicates that college hockey and football play

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards