Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 01:06 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 01:06
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 
605-655 Level|   Weaken|                           
User avatar
Hector1S
User avatar
Joined: 31 May 2017
Last visit: 05 Apr 2023
Posts: 30
Own Kudos:
12
Given Kudos: 67
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 30
Kudos: 12
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 21 Apr 2020, 01:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Thanks for all of the great replies! It looks like there is still some confusion surrounding this question, so let's try to break it down...

The conclusion is that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." In other words, attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem will CAUSE a great improvement in one's social skills. How does the author arrive at that conclusion?

  • 100 volunteers take a psychological questionnaire to measure their self-esteem.
  • Each volunteer is also asked to rate his or her own social skills. Note that their self-esteem was MEASURED by the questionnaire while their social skills were rated by the volunteers themselves.
  • Based on the results of the questionnaire, the psychologists could break up the 100 volunteers into groups, including those with the highest levels of self-esteem and those with moderate levels of self esteem.
  • Now the psychologists could compare the SELF-RATED social skills of those two groups: "the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels."

Based on that evidence, the author concludes that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem would greatly improve one's social skills. Why is this argument vulnerable to criticism?

Quote:
A. It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.
All that matters is that the test did in fact measure self-esteem, regardless of whether the volunteers understood what the questionnaire was designed to measure. Choice (A) can be eliminated.

Quote:
B. It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.
The author's line of reasoning does not involve taking this assumption for granted. If anything, the author assumes something closer to the opposite (that those with high self esteem had worse social skills before attaining their high levels of self esteem. Since (B) is inaccurate, it cannot be grounds for criticizing the author's argument and can be eliminated.

Quote:
C. It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.
What if volunteers with very high levels of self-esteem do tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills? In that case, the ratings those volunteers gave to describe their own social skills would be inaccurate, and we couldn't be sure which of the two groups (those with high levels of self-esteem and those with moderate levels of self-esteem) actually had better social skills. In other words, the ratings of the volunteers' social skills would not be reliable, so the ratings could not be used as valid evidence to support the author's conclusion. (C) looks pretty good.

Quote:
D. It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.
Pay attention to the word choice in the last sentence: "This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." The author does not say the evidence proves or confirms this conclusion. Thus, the author implicitly acknowledges that it is only a small sample. Regardless, evidence from a small sample can certainly suggest whether a certain theory is true. In other words, the evidence from the group of 100 volunteers certainly supports the author's conclusion, so (D) is not a valid criticism.

Quote:
E. It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.
The author does not argue that self-esteem is the only factor or even the most important factor affecting the strength of one's social skills. The author simply argues that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." This argument could still hold even if there were several other factors that had a greater impact on the strength of one's self-esteem. (E) can be eliminated.

Hopefully that adds some clarity!
Show more

I still have an issue with the option C- the stem states that higher self esteem leads to a GREAT improvement in social skills, option C says that the high self-esteem group has a lower accuracy in perception of their level of skills. How can you assume that lower accuracy in perception=lower levels of self esteem? What I am trying to say is that lower accuracy in perception may also mean a very high level of social skills and this option may be slightly strengthening the argument.

Option E on the other hand does a better job at weakening the argument by providing an alternate cause which has a GREATER impact on the level of social skills than high levels of self esteem.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,781
 [1]
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: 7,445
Kudos: 69,781
 [1]
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 01 May 2020, 13:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Ujaswin

I still have an issue with the option C- the stem states that higher self esteem leads to a GREAT improvement in social skills, option C says that the high self-esteem group has a lower accuracy in perception of their level of skills. How can you assume that lower accuracy in perception=lower levels of self esteem? What I am trying to say is that lower accuracy in perception may also mean a very high level of social skills and this option may be slightly strengthening the argument.

Option E on the other hand does a better job at weakening the argument by providing an alternate cause which has a GREATER impact on the level of social skills than high levels of self esteem.
Show more
Take another look at the exact wording of the question:
Quote:
The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
Show more
We're not tasked with utterly obliterating the author's argument -- our job is just to find the answer choice that expresses the way that the argument is MOST vulnerable to criticism, when compared with the other answer choices.

So, you're right that (C) doesn't give us ironclad proof that the people with a less accurate perception of their social skills actually have worse social skills than they report. But we don't need ironclad proof -- we just need need to poke a hole in the psychologist's argument. (C) points out that the volunteers' ratings, which are an integral part of the psychologist's argument, may not be reliable. This is a massive flaw in the argument, so (C) is looking good.

Here's (E):
Quote:
(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.
Show more
To choose this as an answer, it must be true that the psychologist's argument "overlooks" the possibility that other factors are involved.

This would be the the case if the psychologist argued that the ONLY factor affecting social skills is self esteem. It could even be true if he/she argued that the GREATEST factor affecting social skills is self esteem. But he/she doesn't say that. Instead, he/she concludes that "attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills." This is entirely compatible with other factors having a greater impact on social skills -- so long as self-esteem greatly improves social skills, it doesn't matter whether other factors do so as well.

Because the psychologist doesn't overlook the possibility of other factors, his/her argument is not vulnerable to the criticism in (E).

I hope that helps!
avatar
jack0997
avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2013
Last visit: 29 Oct 2022
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
83
Given Kudos: 25
Posts: 34
Kudos: 83
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 15 Jan 2021, 04:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AbdurRakib
The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review 2018
Practice Question
Critical Reasoning
Question no. 182
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.

The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

(A) It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

(D) It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.

Show Spoiler
Argument Evaluation

Situation
In a psychological study of 100 volunteers, those found to have the highest self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did those found to have moderate self-esteem.

Reasoning
What is wrong with the psychologist citing the study's results to justify the conclusion that exceptionally high self-esteem greatly improves social skills? The psychologist reasons that the study shows a correlation between very high self-esteem and how highly one rates one's social skills, and that this correlation in turn suggests that very high self-esteem improves social skills. This argument is vulnerable to at least two criticisms: First, the argument assumes that the volunteers' ratings of their own social skills are generally accurate. But very high self-esteem might in many cases result from a tendency to overestimate oneself and one's skills, including one's social skills. Second, the argument fails to address the possibility that good social skills promote high self-esteem rather than vice versa, as well as the possibility that some third factor (such as a sunny disposition or fortunate circumstances) promotes both high self-esteem and good social skills.

(A) An experiment's subjects do not have to understand the experiment's design in order for the experimental results to be accurate.

(B) To the contrary, the argument concludes that the volunteers with the highest self-esteem attained their enhanced social skills as a result of attaining such high self-esteem.

(C) Correct. As explained above, very high self-esteem may often result from a tendency to overestimate oneself in general, and thus to overestimate one's social skills.

(D) A group of 100 volunteers is large enough for an experiment to provide at least a little support for at least some inferences regarding people in general.

(E) As explained above, the argument overlooks the possibility that some third factor may play a significant role in determining the strength of one's social skills. But even if some factor other than self-esteem is more important in determining the strength of social skills, that would still be compatible with very high self-esteem being of some importance in improving one's social skills.
Show more

GMATNinja, VeritasKarishma

Are (1) In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. AND (2) The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. two separate events?

I mean once event (1) is performed and then event (2) is performed.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,985
 [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: 76,985
 [1]
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 18 Jan 2021, 03:57
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jack0997
AbdurRakib
The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review 2018
Practice Question
Critical Reasoning
Question no. 182
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.

The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

(A) It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

(D) It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.

Show Spoiler
Argument Evaluation

Situation
In a psychological study of 100 volunteers, those found to have the highest self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did those found to have moderate self-esteem.

Reasoning
What is wrong with the psychologist citing the study's results to justify the conclusion that exceptionally high self-esteem greatly improves social skills? The psychologist reasons that the study shows a correlation between very high self-esteem and how highly one rates one's social skills, and that this correlation in turn suggests that very high self-esteem improves social skills. This argument is vulnerable to at least two criticisms: First, the argument assumes that the volunteers' ratings of their own social skills are generally accurate. But very high self-esteem might in many cases result from a tendency to overestimate oneself and one's skills, including one's social skills. Second, the argument fails to address the possibility that good social skills promote high self-esteem rather than vice versa, as well as the possibility that some third factor (such as a sunny disposition or fortunate circumstances) promotes both high self-esteem and good social skills.

(A) An experiment's subjects do not have to understand the experiment's design in order for the experimental results to be accurate.

(B) To the contrary, the argument concludes that the volunteers with the highest self-esteem attained their enhanced social skills as a result of attaining such high self-esteem.

(C) Correct. As explained above, very high self-esteem may often result from a tendency to overestimate oneself in general, and thus to overestimate one's social skills.

(D) A group of 100 volunteers is large enough for an experiment to provide at least a little support for at least some inferences regarding people in general.

(E) As explained above, the argument overlooks the possibility that some third factor may play a significant role in determining the strength of one's social skills. But even if some factor other than self-esteem is more important in determining the strength of social skills, that would still be compatible with very high self-esteem being of some importance in improving one's social skills.

GMATNinja, VeritasKarishma

Are (1) In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. AND (2) The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. two separate events?

I mean once event (1) is performed and then event (2) is performed.
Show more

jack0997

Yes, these are two separate events.
First, their "self esteem" was measured using a questionnaire.
Then they were asked to rate the strength of their own "social skills".
avatar
pk6969
avatar
Joined: 25 May 2020
Last visit: 02 Jan 2022
Posts: 136
Own Kudos:
14
Given Kudos: 70
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Schools: Babson CBS '23 Broad
GPA: 3.2
Schools: Babson CBS '23 Broad
Posts: 136
Kudos: 14
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 13 Sep 2021, 04:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
[quote="AbdurRakib"]Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.

The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

(A) It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

(D) It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.

Hi AndrewN IanStewart
I was just reviewing my questions and saw this question. After analysing the answer choices, I wasn't sure about how can I eliminate B. Option B states that the argument takes for granted that volunteers with high levels of self esteem already had better social skills, even before they had high levels of esteem. So basically it makes self esteem independent of social skills. Hence, I found this a good weakener, thus making it vulnerable to criticism. Can you please explain where am I going wrong? I know that C is a better weakener but still couldn't eliminate B option(I try to follow policy of finding 4 wrong answers as music as possible).
User avatar
IanStewart
User avatar
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,145
Own Kudos:
10,986
 [2]
Given Kudos: 99
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,145
Kudos: 10,986
 [2]
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 13 Sep 2021, 05:26
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
pk6969

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

I was just reviewing my questions and saw this question. After analysing the answer choices, I wasn't sure about how can I eliminate B. Option B states that the argument takes for granted that volunteers with high levels of self esteem already had better social skills, even before they had high levels of esteem. So basically it makes self esteem independent of social skills. Hence, I found this a good weakener, thus making it vulnerable to criticism.
Show more

It's true that an answer like B could have been correct here, but it would need to say the exact opposite of what it does say. The argument ignores the possibility that the volunteers with the highest reported self-esteem already had great social skills, before attaining their high level of self-esteem. That is, the argument might be reversing cause and effect: the argument concludes that by raising self-esteem, one improves social skills. But it could be true that people first improve social skills, and that leads to higher self-esteem. That's actually the kind of answer I was expecting to find among the choices when I first saw this question, since so many CR questions test correlation/causation errors, but B essentially says the opposite of that, so it's not right. The argument doesn't "take for granted" that the social skills of the high self-esteem volunteers were good before that self-esteem was attained; instead it completely ignores that possibility.

pk6969
(I try to follow policy of finding 4 wrong answers as music as possible).
Show more

That might be a good policy when you're studying. When I'm answering official CR questions, my "policy" is to find the right answer, rather than the four wrong ones, because the logic of official questions is so airtight that the right answer will always be unambiguously correct.
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi Updated on: 10 Jan 2023, 22:21
Originally posted by jabhatta2 on 10 Jan 2023, 19:17.
Last edited by jabhatta2 on 10 Jan 2023, 22:21, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Experts - i was wondering if this is ANOTHER weakener.

(Option F) - Having Improvement in social skills CAUSES improvement in self esteem

If I understand, this is ANOTHER weakener to the argument.

Reason - i think the argument says -- improvement in self esteem CAUSES Improvement in social skills

Option F - reverses the causality.

Could you confirm ?

IanStewart
User avatar
jabhatta2
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Last visit: 21 Apr 2023
Posts: 1,294
Own Kudos:
317
Given Kudos: 188
Posts: 1,294
Kudos: 317
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi Updated on: 10 Jan 2023, 22:36
Originally posted by jabhatta2 on 10 Jan 2023, 19:43.
Last edited by jabhatta2 on 10 Jan 2023, 22:36, edited 5 times in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Is (B) - can i replace the phrase "it takes for granted" to be instead "it assumes"
User avatar
IanStewart
User avatar
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,145
Own Kudos:
10,986
Given Kudos: 99
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,145
Kudos: 10,986
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 10 Jan 2023, 19:43
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jabhatta2

Option F - reverses the causality.

Could you confirm ?

IanStewart
Show more

Yes, you are right, that answer choice would have been right had it been among the choices -- my only previous post in this thread says exactly that, so you can read that post for more detail.

edit: and I just saw you made a followup post, and I think I address your followup question in my earlier post too.
User avatar
ashutosh_73
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jan 2018
Last visit: 30 Oct 2024
Posts: 234
Own Kudos:
1,636
Given Kudos: 86
Location: India
Posts: 234
Kudos: 1,636
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 25 Oct 2023, 08:48
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
kunalkhanna
I am inclined towards 'B' and need suggestion to clear my doubt, according to me 'B' can be seen as reversal of cause and effect ie, high esteem is the result of social skills as people with the highest level of self esteem had better social skills even before attaining high levels of self esteem
kunalkhanna and tejyr, the psychologist suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. In other words, a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills.

Choice (B), on the other hand, implies that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem already had better social skills, even before they had attained their high levels of self-esteem ("the former volunteers" simply refers to "the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem").

But this is not consistent with the argument. If they already had better social skills, that would weaken the idea that a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills (since the social skills were already good). So (B) should be eliminated.

Check out this post for a more complete explanation.

I hope that helps!
Show more



Hi GMATNinja , KarishmaB, MartyMurray

I read almost all the explanations here, but i am unable to understand why (B) is not the correct answer. Below are the reasons that i think support (B):


Premise:
Volunteers with high self-esteem consistently rated better on social skills than did volunteers with moderate levels

Conclusion:
exceptionally high level of self esteem(''A'') ---> improves social skills(''B'')

1. So the argument takes a big jump from a mere ''correlation'' to ''causation''

So if i prove that ''B'' was there before ''A'', then i am putting a dent on the argument.

It takes for granted that Volunteers had better social skills BEFORE they had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

so it weakens no?

2. GMATNinja explained in several posters that ''B'' weakens the arguments, and that ''weakens'' not equal to ''vulnerable to criticism''

But in option (C) we are doing nothing but weakening the argument, as we do in (B)

In both (B) and (C) we are actually claiming that: Hey your conclusion is not correct.

Sure, there is some gap in my understanding, please help!
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,985
 [4]
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: 76,985
 [4]
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 26 Oct 2023, 22:57
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ashutosh_73
GMATNinja
kunalkhanna
I am inclined towards 'B' and need suggestion to clear my doubt, according to me 'B' can be seen as reversal of cause and effect ie, high esteem is the result of social skills as people with the highest level of self esteem had better social skills even before attaining high levels of self esteem
kunalkhanna and tejyr, the psychologist suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills. In other words, a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills.

Choice (B), on the other hand, implies that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem already had better social skills, even before they had attained their high levels of self-esteem ("the former volunteers" simply refers to "the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem").

But this is not consistent with the argument. If they already had better social skills, that would weaken the idea that a high level of self-esteem causes improved social skills (since the social skills were already good). So (B) should be eliminated.

Check out this post for a more complete explanation.

I hope that helps!



Hi GMATNinja , KarishmaB, MartyMurray

I read almost all the explanations here, but i am unable to understand why (B) is not the correct answer. Below are the reasons that i think support (B):


Premise:
Volunteers with high self-esteem consistently rated better on social skills than did volunteers with moderate levels

Conclusion:
exceptionally high level of self esteem(''A'') ---> improves social skills(''B'')

1. So the argument takes a big jump from a mere ''correlation'' to ''causation''

So if i prove that ''B'' was there before ''A'', then i am putting a dent on the argument.

It takes for granted that Volunteers had better social skills BEFORE they had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

so it weakens no?

2. GMATNinja explained in several posters that ''B'' weakens the arguments, and that ''weakens'' not equal to ''vulnerable to criticism''

But in option (C) we are doing nothing but weakening the argument, as we do in (B)

In both (B) and (C) we are actually claiming that: Hey your conclusion is not correct.

Sure, there is some gap in my understanding, please help!
Show more

Option (B) is plain wrong and once you see it, you won't be able to un-see it so here goes:

100 volunteers were asked to rate their own self esteem.
Then they were asked to rate their social skills.
Those who rated themselves as having high self esteem also rated themselves as having great social skills.

Conclusion: High self esteem leads to great social skills.


What is the flaw here? We are asking people to rate their self esteem and social skills themselves. Those who rate their self esteem highly - aren't they more likely to rate their skills and talents highly too? They have high self esteem - in simple words, they think they are really good and special. They are likely to say that they do their work really well, people like them, people like to be friends with them etc, aren't they? Yes, they are. And that is the problem. Do they really have good social skills? We don't know. Their own opinion may be biased because they rate themselves highly on esteem.
and that is the flaw of this argument. We cannot conclude that high self esteem gives one good social skills. To find out whether they actually have good social skills, we need to find a more unbiased method to rate their social skills.


Now look at (B): It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

Does the argument take for granted (assume) that people with high self esteem had better social skills before they attained high esteem? No. Quite the contrary. The argument is actually saying that people got great social skills after they attained high self esteem and because of high self esteem. So if anything the argument is assuming that people got self esteem first and social skills after. Option (B) says that the argument is assuming that people already had great social skills before they attained high self esteem. But the argument is actually doing the opposite.
Hence option (B) is not the flaw in the argument.

In correlation causation terms, say an argument gives you:

Premise: A and B were found together.
Conclusion: A causes B.

Can I say that the argument is flawed because it is assuming that B was already present before A happened? No, the argument is certainly not doing that. It is saying that A caused B. It is not assuming that B was already present before A happened.

What you are getting confused with is - It FAILS TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT that people could have already had high social skills before acquiring high self esteem.
This could have been a flaw (though our original argument focuses more on 'self evaluation' aspect) but option (B) does not give this. Look at the difference in the two highlighted parts above.
User avatar
thelastskybender
User avatar
Joined: 26 Dec 2022
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 132
Own Kudos:
75
Given Kudos: 50
Location: India
Schools: IIMA '25 (II) INSEAD Aug'24 intake
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
Schools: IIMA '25 (II) INSEAD Aug'24 intake
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
Posts: 132
Kudos: 75
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 22 May 2025, 22:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Would option B be correct if it were worded like this: 'It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem might have had better social skills than the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem'?
User avatar
bb
User avatar
Founder
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 42,384
Own Kudos:
82,113
Given Kudos: 24,107
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
Posts: 42,384
Kudos: 82,113
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi Updated on: 22 May 2025, 23:16
Originally posted by bb on 22 May 2025, 23:14.
Last edited by bb on 22 May 2025, 23:16, edited 1 time in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
thelastskybender
Would option B be correct if it were worded like this: 'It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem might have had better social skills than the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem'?
Show more

Hey there!

Sorry, I don't think B would be correct revised , and would likely be even a bit weaker than the original B.

  • The original "had" makes B sound like an assumption the psychologist is making (that skills were better beforehand).
  • "Might have had" turns it into a possibility the psychologist overlooks, which is a type of flaw, but it's still about an alternative explanation, not the reliability of the data in this question.


The strongest criticism of this argument is C), as it attacks the foundation of the evidence (the self-ratings).
User avatar
findingmyself
User avatar
Joined: 06 Apr 2025
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 231
Own Kudos:
157
Given Kudos: 57
Posts: 231
Kudos: 157
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 16 Aug 2025, 09:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi KarishmaB

It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

We don't know the appropriate size of the volunteer group.

The question stem says that there is only 100 volunteers to whom the questionnaire was given, The explanation that this size is small or large is only relevant when we know about the "General" population size. For eg: General population is 1,00,000 then size of volunteers is so small, but if General population is 150, then size is good enough.
[color=#000000]Author makes an evidence Statistical data and assumes that data will provide a solid support to his conclusion. This is a case and this makes it a probable answer choice., I am i wrong?[/color]

KarishmaB
AbdurRakib
The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review 2018
Practice Question
Critical Reasoning
Question no. 182
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.

The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

(A) It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

(D) It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.


Researchers measured self-esteem using questionnaire
They then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills
Volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills

Conclusion: Attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.

Some pre-thinking: We are concluding that self esteem improves social skills. But note that the strength of social skills is judged by the volunteers themselves, not the researchers. We don't know whether people with high self esteem actually do have better social skills. We also don't know whether self esteem improves social skills or social skills improve self esteem.

(A) It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.

Irrelevant. In fact, we would much rather they do not know what we are testing so that they cannot "game" the result.

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

It does not assume that people with high levels of self esteem had better social skill before they got high levels of self esteem. In fact, our argument is saying that attaining high levels of self esteem makes them have better social skills.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

Correct. As discussed in our pre thinking, people with high self esteem rate themselves on their social skills. Due to high self esteem, they may be rating themselves better than their actual social skills. So self esteem may not have developed their social skills, it may have just developed their perception of their social skills.

(D) It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

We don't know the appropriate size of volunteer group.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.

It does not overlook that other causes could be present.
The argument says: This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.
We don't know what else could greatly improve one's social skills. It just says that self esteem is a contributing factor. It does not say that it is the only contributing factor.

Answer (C)
Show more
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,985
 [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: 76,985
 [1]
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 18 Aug 2025, 04:04
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Surveys are conducted on a sample of the population - what is the "right" sample size, we cannot say based on an absolute number. As long as the sample is unbiased, even a small sample may be enough to indicate the conclusion or it may not be. We cannot say without additional data. Even if the population is 1000,000, an unbiased sample of 100 people could be useful.

findingmyself
Hi KarishmaB

It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

We don't know the appropriate size of the volunteer group.

The question stem says that there is only 100 volunteers to whom the questionnaire was given, The explanation that this size is small or large is only relevant when we know about the "General" population size. For eg: General population is 1,00,000 then size of volunteers is so small, but if General population is 150, then size is good enough.
[color=#000000]Author makes an evidence Statistical data and assumes that data will provide a solid support to his conclusion. This is a case and this makes it a probable answer choice., I am i wrong?[/color]

KarishmaB
AbdurRakib
The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review 2018
Practice Question
Critical Reasoning
Question no. 182
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychological questionnaire designed to measure their self-esteem. The researchers then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills. The volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills than did the volunteers with moderate levels. This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.

The psychologist’s argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

(A) It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

(D) It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.


Researchers measured self-esteem using questionnaire
They then asked each volunteer to rate the strength of his or her own social skills
Volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem consistently rated themselves as having much better social skills

Conclusion: Attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.

Some pre-thinking: We are concluding that self esteem improves social skills. But note that the strength of social skills is judged by the volunteers themselves, not the researchers. We don't know whether people with high self esteem actually do have better social skills. We also don't know whether self esteem improves social skills or social skills improve self esteem.

(A) It fails to adequately address the possibility that many of the volunteers may not have understood what the psychological questionnaire was designed to measure.

Irrelevant. In fact, we would much rather they do not know what we are testing so that they cannot "game" the result.

(B) It takes for granted that the volunteers with the highest levels of self-esteem had better social skills than did the other volunteers, even before the former volunteers had attained their high levels of self-esteem.

It does not assume that people with high levels of self esteem had better social skill before they got high levels of self esteem. In fact, our argument is saying that attaining high levels of self esteem makes them have better social skills.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills than do people with moderate levels of self-esteem.

Correct. As discussed in our pre thinking, people with high self esteem rate themselves on their social skills. Due to high self esteem, they may be rating themselves better than their actual social skills. So self esteem may not have developed their social skills, it may have just developed their perception of their social skills.

(D) It relies on evidence from a group of volunteers that is too small to provide any support for any inferences regarding people in general.

We don't know the appropriate size of volunteer group.

(E) It overlooks the possibility that factors other than level of self-esteem may be of much greater importance in determining the strength of one’s social skills.

It does not overlook that other causes could be present.
The argument says: This suggests that attaining an exceptionally high level of self-esteem greatly improves one’s social skills.
We don't know what else could greatly improve one's social skills. It just says that self esteem is a contributing factor. It does not say that it is the only contributing factor.

Answer (C)
Show more
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 18 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
Psychologist: In a study, researchers gave 100 volunteers a psychologi 06 Oct 2025, 06:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Flaw questions can be tricky because you need to spot the gap between what the argument says and what it assumes. Let me walk you through how to think about this one.

Breaking Down the Argument

First, let's identify what the psychologist is actually concluding:

Conclusion: Attaining exceptionally high self-esteem greatly improves one's actual social skills.

Evidence: In a study, volunteers with the highest self-esteem rated themselves as having much better social skills than volunteers with moderate self-esteem.

Notice something? The conclusion is about actual social skills improving, but the evidence is only about how people rated themselves. That's your red flag right there.

The Core Flaw

Here's what you need to see: The psychologist is treating self-perception as if it's the same thing as objective reality. Just because high self-esteem people think they have better social skills doesn't mean they actually do.

Let's think about this with a simple example: If I asked someone who thinks they're amazing at everything to rate their singing ability, they might give themselves a 9/10. But that doesn't mean they can actually sing well—they might be tone-deaf! Their high self-regard could make them less accurate at judging their own abilities.

Why Answer Choice C Nails It

Answer choice C points out exactly this vulnerability: "It overlooks the possibility that people with very high levels of self-esteem may tend to have a less accurate perception of the strength of their own social skills."

This directly attacks the assumption that self-ratings reflect actual ability. If people with very high self-esteem systematically overestimate their abilities, then their higher self-ratings tell us nothing about whether their social skills actually improved.

Quick Elimination of Wrong Answers

  • A: Whether volunteers understood the self-esteem questionnaire doesn't address the core logical gap between self-rating and actual ability.
  • B: The argument doesn't assume they always had better skills—it claims attaining high self-esteem improves them.
  • D: 100 volunteers is a reasonable sample size. The problem isn't the number of participants but how the data is interpreted.
  • E: Even if other factors matter for social skills, this doesn't address why we should trust self-ratings as evidence of actual ability.

The answer is C.

Want to Master This Systematically?

This question represents a specific pattern of reasoning flaw that appears repeatedly on the GMAT. You can check out the complete solution on Neuron by e-GMAT to understand the systematic framework for identifying perception vs. reality flaws and see how this pattern appears in different contexts. You can also practice with comprehensive explanations for other official CR questions on Neuron with detailed analytics to track your progress on flaw questions specifically.

Hope this helps!
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts