Harsh020
I'm struggling with why (B) is considered strong support for the psychologists' interpretation.
The psychologists' hypothesis is that seeing a credit-card logo reminds cardholders that their spending power exceeds the cash they currently have available. In other words, the logo reminds them of access to credit.
However, (B) says that patrons under financial pressure from their credit-card obligations tip less when they see the logo.
Why should this support the hypothesis?
Someone under significant credit-card debt can still have spending power that exceeds their available cash. For example, a person with $50 in cash, a $20,000 credit limit, and $15,000 in outstanding debt still has spending power that exceeds the cash currently available.
To get from (B) to the psychologists' conclusion, it seems necessary to assume an additional premise: that people under financial pressure react negatively to reminders of credit, whereas people without such pressure react positively. But that assumption is not stated in the stimulus.
In contrast, if a credit-card logo causes people to use that specific credit card more often (as in E), doesn't that at least show that the logo is affecting spending-related behavior through thoughts about credit cards?
What am I missing?
B supports the psychologists’ interpretation because it shows that the credit-card logo affects people through their thoughts about credit-card finances.
For ordinary credit-card holders, the logo may remind them of extra spending power, so they tip more. For people under credit-card pressure, the same logo may remind them of debt, so they tip less. In both cases,
the logo is affecting behavior by triggering credit-related thoughts.
This does not need to prove the whole hypothesis. It only needs to strengthen it.
E is weaker because it shows that a logo can influence which card people use, not that the logo makes cash-paying customers feel able to spend more. So E is about
payment choice, while B is about the psychological mechanism behind spending.
This question has been discussed extensively on the previous two pages, with several very good expert responses, so I suggest reviewing those carefully for more.