Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 17:45 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 17:45
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
655-705 Level|   Weaken|         
User avatar
noboru
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Last visit: 15 Jan 2020
Posts: 539
Own Kudos:
9,464
 [30]
Given Kudos: 2
Schools:CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Posts: 539
Kudos: 9,464
 [30]
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 22 Oct 2010, 10:34
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
28
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

62% (01:41) correct 38% (01:56) wrong based on 928 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all other things being equal, most people who have pets are less happy than most people who do not. Therefore, any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the sociologist’s argument?

(A) Some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not.
(B) Most people who have no pets occasionally wish that they had pets.
(C) Most people who have pets are reasonably happy.
(D) Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets.
(E) All people who have no pets admit to feeling unhappy sometimes.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
D
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,265
Own Kudos:
76,982
 [5]
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: 16,265
Kudos: 76,982
 [5]
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot Updated on: 01 Apr 2025, 21:42
Originally posted by KarishmaB on 18 Nov 2010, 07:12.
Last edited by KarishmaB on 01 Apr 2025, 21:42, edited 1 time in total.
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
noboru
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all other things being equal, most people who have pets are less happy than most people who do not. Therefore, any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the sociologist’s argument?
(A) Some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not.
(B) Most people who have no pets occasionally wish that they had pets.
(C) Most people who have pets are reasonably happy.
(D) Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets.
(E) All people who have no pets admit to feeling unhappy sometimes.

Between A and D what is your take?
Show more

Premise:
Most people who have pets are less happy than most people who do not.
Conclusion:
Any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet.

What the argument doesn't say is that pets are the reason why people who have them are not as happy. We do not know what is the causal agent here. Is that people were unhappy in the first place and hence got pets to be happier? or is it that they were happy and got pets and then got unhappy?
What would weaken my conclusion is: People were unhappy in the first place and hence got pets and got happier. In that case, getting a pet would make people relatively happier than before.

Option (D) says exactly this. Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets. Lets say on a scale of 1 to 10 of happiness, people without pets are at 9 and those with pets are at 7. Those who have pets were actually at 5 without pets but came up to 7 because of their pets. So without the pets they would go down to 5 (may be even 3 because losing a pet is terrible but that's besides the point!) This seriously weakens my conclusion that if you want to be as happy as possible, don't get a pet.

Option (A) is incorrect because even if some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not, they could be few and exceptional cases. You cannot draw general statements based on the cases of few people. General statements can be drawn only from what most people experience.

Here are two more weaken question discussions:
https://youtu.be/55QgRwZmFRo
https://youtu.be/Nl9wXcDY-ps
General Discussion
User avatar
gmat1011
User avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Last visit: 22 Dec 2012
Posts: 139
Own Kudos:
256
 [1]
Given Kudos: 20
Posts: 139
Kudos: 256
 [1]
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 22 Oct 2010, 12:17
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I thinks its D.

Conclusion: ANY person to feel as happy as possible - don't keep a pet ("as happy as possible" - seems to refer to their own potential to achieve max possible happiness and not happiness in a comparative framework judged against those who don't have pets)

D - most people with pets feel "happier" because they have pets. so without a pet they will never be able to be "as happy as possible", coz they could always be "happier" with pets. Thus, conclusion wrt ANY person is defeated.
avatar
wishnuv
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2010
Last visit: 23 Sep 2011
Posts: 12
Own Kudos:
10
 [1]
Given Kudos: 9
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Schools: CBS '14 (A) INSEAD '14 (D)
GPA: 3.6
WE:Engineering (Telecommunications)
Schools: CBS '14 (A) INSEAD '14 (D)
Posts: 12
Kudos: 10
 [1]
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 25 Oct 2010, 19:05
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
D - I feel its a causality question. The pets do not cause the people to be less happy, but they are already unhappy people, and the pets increase their happiness.
User avatar
londondungeon19
User avatar
Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Last visit: 21 Nov 2010
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
2
 [1]
Posts: 1
Kudos: 2
 [1]
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 27 Oct 2010, 06:42
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A is wrong because:
1. The stimulus uses strong words as 'most' whereas option A uses 'some' in one place
2. Option D establishes the reason of happiness to be 'pets' whereas, option A fails to do that.
User avatar
carcass
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,754
Own Kudos:
37,011
Given Kudos: 4,856
Posts: 4,754
Kudos: 37,011
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 13 Nov 2010, 09:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
noboru
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all other things being equal, most people who have pets are less happy than most people who do not. Therefore, any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the sociologist’s argument?
(A) Some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not.
(B) Most people who have no pets occasionally wish that they had pets.
(C) Most people who have pets are reasonably happy.
(D) Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets.
(E) All people who have no pets admit to feeling unhappy sometimes.

Between A and D what is your take?
Show more

I think so: the argument clearly says that people are NOT happy with pets, and we must contraddict this point.

So we can split between who HAVE pets and who HAVE NO pets, we interest who HAVE pets.

from this B and E out.

A make a comparison, again, but maybe happier, true , but we are not sure about this.

C reasonably happy: again as A: maybe or not

D Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets.: for sure..........people do not care, they are happy and stop.

:)
User avatar
noboru
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Last visit: 15 Jan 2020
Posts: 539
Own Kudos:
9,464
Given Kudos: 2
Schools:CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Posts: 539
Kudos: 9,464
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 14 Nov 2010, 04:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I'm still not conviced with the reasons you are providing to ruling out A.
User avatar
girisshhh84
User avatar
Joined: 27 Aug 2010
Last visit: 03 Apr 2011
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
39
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 17
Kudos: 39
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 18 Nov 2010, 03:06
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
noboru
I'm still not conviced with the reasons you are providing to ruling out A.
Show more

Some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not. Suppose two people A(who has a pet) and B(who doesnt have a pet)

Premise says -
A less happy than B

Conclusion-
For A or B to be as happy as possible they should not have a pet

Consider A or B want to be as happy as possible , which of them below statements can they use -
(A) Some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not. - This says that some A are happier than B , doesnt help much to decide how can 1 be more happier.
(D) Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets - This says that A or for that matter B can be happier if they have a pet which directly attach the conclusion

Hope, it clears the confusion.
User avatar
Mizar18
User avatar
Joined: 28 Jan 2019
Last visit: 23 Oct 2025
Posts: 177
Own Kudos:
266
 [1]
Given Kudos: 130
Location: Peru
Posts: 177
Kudos: 266
 [1]
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 27 May 2020, 11:36
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Conclusion: Not having a pet => Be as happy as possible

Option A is wrong because:

1)
VeritasKarishma


Option (A) is incorrect because even if some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not, they could be few and exceptional cases. You cannot draw general statements based on the cases of few people. General statements can be drawn only from what most people experience.
Show more

2) In addition to what is quoted, I would say that A) is flawed because the argument mentions that "any person who wants to be as happy as possible", so the fact that "some people who have pets are happier" (option A), does not mean that this people is happy as possible, right? Maybe the pets are diminishing their happiness.

So, this choice does not debilitate the argument because it makes a generalization based on "few people" and it does not assure the point of the argument (be happy as possible)

Option D) is correct because:

It weakens the argument by stating that the cause and effect of the conclusion is faulty: Not having a pet => Be as happy as possible, and gives us an alternate cause: Having pets =>Be as happy as possible.

Best
User avatar
gauravjain0211
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jan 2017
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
7
Given Kudos: 14
Posts: 15
Kudos: 7
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 13 Jan 2022, 07:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
noboru
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all other things being equal, most people who have pets are less happy than most people who do not. Therefore, any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the sociologist’s argument?
(A) Some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not.
(B) Most people who have no pets occasionally wish that they had pets.
(C) Most people who have pets are reasonably happy.
(D) Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets.
(E) All people who have no pets admit to feeling unhappy sometimes.

Between A and D what is your take?

Premise:
Most people who have pets are less happy than most people who do not.
Conclusion:
Any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet.

What the argument doesn't say is that pets are the reason why people who have them are not as happy. We do not know what is the causal agent here. Is that people were unhappy in the first place and hence got pets to be happier? or is it that they were happy and got pets and then got unhappy?
What would weaken my conclusion is: People were unhappy in the first place and hence got pets and got happier. In that case, getting a pet would make people relatively happier than before.

Option (D) says exactly this. Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets. Lets say on a scale of 1 to 10 of happiness, people without pets are at 9 and those with pets are at 7. Those who have pets were actually at 5 without pets but came up to 7 because of their pets. So without the pets they would go down to 5 (may be even 3 because losing a pet is terrible but that's besides the point!) This seriously weakens my conclusion that if you want to be as happy as possible, don't get a pet.

Option (A) is incorrect because even if some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not, they could be few and exceptional cases. You cannot draw general statements based on the cases of few people. General statements can be drawn only from what most people experience.
Show more



But premise also say 'all things being equal' then how can we say people were unhappy in the first place or less happy in the first place.
User avatar
rvgmat12
User avatar
Joined: 19 Oct 2014
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 356
Own Kudos:
373
 [1]
Given Kudos: 189
Location: United Arab Emirates
Schools: Wharton '23 Booth '23 INSEAD Jan'21 Intake
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Wharton '23 Booth '23 INSEAD Jan'21 Intake
Posts: 356
Kudos: 373
 [1]
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 15 Jan 2022, 07:57
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
From Manhattan:

The argument's conclusion is that people who want to maximize their happiness should not get a pet. Why? Because those who have pets are less happy than those who do not. Since this is a weaken question, we should look for a gap. The gap lies somewhere between the two forms of measurement. The conclusion focuses on maximizing one's potential for happiness while the premise compares two groups.

Analogously: You should not take heart medication because in general, those who take heart medicine have more heart problems than those who do not. The problem here is that comparing these groups is probably not valid since those who take heart medicine are predisposed to have heart problems.

Similarly, perhaps those who get pets are generally less happy to start with (and thus they get pets in an effort to cheer up). However, if pets do tend to make you happier, as (D) indicates, regardless of which group you're in, you'll probably get happier, contrary to what the conclusion suggests.

(A) is incorrect because it only tells us about some people with pets; that may mean two people!
(B) is out of scope because wishing is not the issue, happiness is.
(C) is irrelevant. What does reasonably happy mean?
(E) is also irrelevant because feeling unhappy sometimes doesn't give us a sense of the overall tendency that we're concerned with.
User avatar
akt715
User avatar
Joined: 12 May 2021
Last visit: 06 Aug 2023
Posts: 67
Own Kudos:
7
Given Kudos: 126
Posts: 67
Kudos: 7
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 16 Jan 2022, 03:56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In the absence of D , could be C be correct choice???
User avatar
agrasan
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jan 2024
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 534
Own Kudos:
130
Given Kudos: 5,193
Location: India
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 534
Kudos: 130
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 31 Mar 2025, 23:07
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi experts KarishmaB GMATNinja MartyMurray

Why is option E wrong?
My reasoning is even though option E uses "All", it uses "sometimes" and the conclusion "Therefore, any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet." doesn't talk about happiness in every time or minute so we should be fine with people without pets being unhappy sometimes. Please let me know if we can reject this on the basis of this reasoning.
User avatar
Wazzzaa
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2024
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 134
Posts: 16
Kudos: 3
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 01 Apr 2025, 07:59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hey, thanks for your answer. O also thought he answer would be (D), but confusion was caused when they said "all other things being equal".
KarishmaB
noboru
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all other things being equal, most people who have pets are less happy than most people who do not. Therefore, any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the sociologist’s argument?
(A) Some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not.
(B) Most people who have no pets occasionally wish that they had pets.
(C) Most people who have pets are reasonably happy.
(D) Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets.
(E) All people who have no pets admit to feeling unhappy sometimes.

Between A and D what is your take?

Premise:
Most people who have pets are less happy than most people who do not.
Conclusion:
Any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet.

What the argument doesn't say is that pets are the reason why people who have them are not as happy. We do not know what is the causal agent here. Is that people were unhappy in the first place and hence got pets to be happier? or is it that they were happy and got pets and then got unhappy?
What would weaken my conclusion is: People were unhappy in the first place and hence got pets and got happier. In that case, getting a pet would make people relatively happier than before.

Option (D) says exactly this. Most people who have pets feel happier because they have pets. Lets say on a scale of 1 to 10 of happiness, people without pets are at 9 and those with pets are at 7. Those who have pets were actually at 5 without pets but came up to 7 because of their pets. So without the pets they would go down to 5 (may be even 3 because losing a pet is terrible but that's besides the point!) This seriously weakens my conclusion that if you want to be as happy as possible, don't get a pet.

Option (A) is incorrect because even if some people who have pets are happier than most people who do not, they could be few and exceptional cases. You cannot draw general statements based on the cases of few people. General statements can be drawn only from what most people experience.
Show more
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,265
Own Kudos:
76,982
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: 16,265
Kudos: 76,982
Sociologist: Research shows, contrary to popular opinion, that, all ot 01 Apr 2025, 21:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Yes, exactly. We are talking about "generally happier" not "always happy". A happy person can also be unhappy sometimes.

agrasan
Hi experts KarishmaB GMATNinja MartyMurray

Why is option E wrong?
My reasoning is even though option E uses "All", it uses "sometimes" and the conclusion "Therefore, any person who wants to be as happy as possible would do well to consider not having a pet." doesn't talk about happiness in every time or minute so we should be fine with people without pets being unhappy sometimes. Please let me know if we can reject this on the basis of this reasoning.
Show more
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts