Last visit was: 10 May 2024, 01:06 It is currently 10 May 2024, 01:06

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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 93135
Own Kudos [?]: 622536 [14]
Given Kudos: 81823
Send PM
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Oct 2018
Status:Whatever it takes!
Posts: 323
Own Kudos [?]: 518 [2]
Given Kudos: 185
GPA: 4
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 10 Aug 2018
Posts: 228
Own Kudos [?]: 141 [0]
Given Kudos: 179
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
WE:Operations (Energy and Utilities)
Send PM
CEO
CEO
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Posts: 2567
Own Kudos [?]: 1826 [0]
Given Kudos: 763
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy and Utilities)
Send PM
Re: Studies indicate that potential buyers of an expensive product are mor [#permalink]
Premise: As per the studies people who have bought an inexpensive product might buy an expensive product offered by the same company. Psychologists believe that commitment bias is the reason behind this behavior – people tend to act in ways similar to their past actions.

Conclusion: If a company makes people buy inexpensive product first then it can increase the sales of its expensive products.
A strengthener would support the cause can effect as suggested by the conclusion.

A. The effect noted in the studies applies to purchases made both in person and online. – WRONG. In person and online are two different situation where a person might not be consistent. However, this still looks good assuming that a person shows consistency in buying in person and online, also that product is of same brand.

B. Customers who have already declared their intent to purchase one item from such a company will not act on their intention by purchasing an inexpensive product in place of an expensive product. – WRONG. Exactly opposite to what we seek to establish. Weakens the argument rather.

C. Not all companies that sell expensive products have inexpensive, easy-to-sell items available to sell. – WRONG. Out of scope. We are not concerned or companies that don’t have inexpensive easy-to-sell items.

D. Commitment bias has been found to be equally strong for purchase made by cash and by credit card. – WRONG. A customer might buy an inexpensive product using cash or card and may again buy inexpensive product using cash or card. How does this increases sales of expensive product can’t be established.

E. The perception that buying an expensive product is consistent with a past purchase of an inexpensive item is strengthened if both of those products prominently feature the same company branding. – CORRECT. This option basically says that if branding differs than the perception of buying an expensive product is inconsistent with a past purchase of an inexpensive product. In a way it says if company branding is same then the argument holds true.

Answer (E).
Intern
Intern
Joined: 09 Jan 2018
Posts: 3
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Studies indicate that potential buyers of an expensive product are mor [#permalink]
I think its E; if company branding is present than it further solidifies relationship between inexpensive and expensive items;
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 93135
Own Kudos [?]: 622536 [2]
Given Kudos: 81823
Send PM
Re: Studies indicate that potential buyers of an expensive product are mor [#permalink]
2
Kudos
Expert Reply
Bunuel wrote:

Competition Mode Question



Studies indicate that potential buyers of an expensive product are more likely to go through with their purchase if they have first made a purchase of a related product, such as an inexpensive product sold by the same company in the same place. Psychologists attribute this behavior to commitment bias, in which people's present actions are influenced by a desire to act consistently with their past actions. A company that sells expensive products will increase sales of these items by first inducing customers to buy inexpensive, easy-to-sell items.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the interpretation of the studies?

A. The effect noted in the studies applies to purchases made both in person and online.

B. Customers who have already declared their intent to purchase one item from such a company will not act on their intention by purchasing an inexpensive product in place of an expensive product.

C. Not all companies that sell expensive products have inexpensive, easy-to-sell items available to sell.

D. Commitment bias has been found to be equally strong for purchase made by cash and by credit card.

E. The perception that buying an expensive product is consistent with a past purchase of an inexpensive item is strengthened if both of those products prominently feature the same company branding.


Official Explanation



Reading the question: The argument seems reasonable, which make a question difficult. The question asks us to strengthen this argument, and to do that we're going to have to be tough and weaken it. Supposing that we can't come up with a filter, we can move straight to the answer choices and use the negation test.

Logical proof: Choice (A) doesn't strengthen the argument itself. If we negate (A)--it applies only to in person, for example--sales might still go up somewhat, and the argument could still be true. So (A) is out. (C) doesn't strengthen the argument--it points out a problem. So (C) is not the answer. (D) is similar to (A) and out on similar grounds. (E) is out, which we can confirm by denying it and finding it's not relevant to the argument. That leaves us with (B). Negating (B) gives us: "Customers who have already declared their intent to purchase one item from such a company will act on their intention by purchasing an inexpensive product in place of an expensive product." This statement would mean people who are already committed to buy something buy the little thing, not the big thing. If that's true, that's a huge problem. So establishing the opposite point of the negation, as (B) does, does strengthen the argument.

The correct answer is (B).
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Aug 2021
Posts: 374
Own Kudos [?]: 36 [1]
Given Kudos: 226
Send PM
Studies indicate that potential buyers of an expensive product are mor [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Bunuel wrote:
Bunuel wrote:

Competition Mode Question



Studies indicate that potential buyers of an expensive product are more likely to go through with their purchase if they have first made a purchase of a related product, such as an inexpensive product sold by the same company in the same place. Psychologists attribute this behavior to commitment bias, in which people's present actions are influenced by a desire to act consistently with their past actions. A company that sells expensive products will increase sales of these items by first inducing customers to buy inexpensive, easy-to-sell items.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the interpretation of the studies?

A. The effect noted in the studies applies to purchases made both in person and online.

B. Customers who have already declared their intent to purchase one item from such a company will not act on their intention by purchasing an inexpensive product in place of an expensive product.

C. Not all companies that sell expensive products have inexpensive, easy-to-sell items available to sell.

D. Commitment bias has been found to be equally strong for purchase made by cash and by credit card.

E. The perception that buying an expensive product is consistent with a past purchase of an inexpensive item is strengthened if both of those products prominently feature the same company branding.


Official Explanation



Reading the question: The argument seems reasonable, which make a question difficult. The question asks us to strengthen this argument, and to do that we're going to have to be tough and weaken it. Supposing that we can't come up with a filter, we can move straight to the answer choices and use the negation test.

Logical proof: Choice (A) doesn't strengthen the argument itself. If we negate (A)--it applies only to in person, for example--sales might still go up somewhat, and the argument could still be true. So (A) is out. (C) doesn't strengthen the argument--it points out a problem. So (C) is not the answer. (D) is similar to (A) and out on similar grounds. (E) is out, which we can confirm by denying it and finding it's not relevant to the argument. That leaves us with (B). Negating (B) gives us: "Customers who have already declared their intent to purchase one item from such a company will act on their intention by purchasing an inexpensive product in place of an expensive product." This statement would mean people who are already committed to buy something buy the little thing, not the big thing. If that's true, that's a huge problem. So establishing the opposite point of the negation, as (B) does, does strengthen the argument.

The correct answer is (B).

Can’t understands the OE. This is not an assumption question, why use the negation method?
I think B may be more like an assumption, so I prefer to E..
Discuss appreciated.
GMAT Club Bot
Studies indicate that potential buyers of an expensive product are mor [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6922 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne