The average price of chicken in the United States

Question

The average price of chicken in the United States was $1.50 per pound from 1995 to 1999 and $2.00 per pound from 2000 to 2004, an increase of about 33 percent. Meanwhile, the average consumption of chicken per capita per year from 1995 to 1999 was 100 pounds; the corresponding figure for 2000 to 2004 was the same. It seems, then, that rising chicken prices have no effect on consumers’ decisions.

The conclusion above would be more properly drawn if we knew that:

(A) Inflation did not increase the price index by as much as 33 percent from the first period to the second and thereby make the real prices between the two periods equal.
(B) Average per capita income in the United States was less than 33 percent higher from 2000 to 2004 than from 1995 to 1999.
(C) The average price of beef during 2000 to 2004 was not higher than it was from 1994 to 1999, so that consumers looked for alternatives.
(D) In general, American consumers are price-insensitive.
(E) From 2005 to 2009, the average price of chicken in the United States will reach $2.67 per pound but the average consumption of chicken per capita per year will remain 100 pounds.

DrHuber · Answer

Best answer: (C)

Identify the conclusion and the premise(s):
Premise: The average price of chicken in the United States was $1.50 per pound from 1995 to 1999 and $2.00 per pound from 2000 to 2004.
Premise: The average consumption of chicken per capita per year from 1995 to 1999 was 100 pounds per person; the corresponding figure for 2000 to 2004 was the same.
Conclusion: Rising chicken prices have no effect on consumers’ decisions.

Explanations:
Identify question type and give some tips:
The correct answer will rule out alternate explanations; there may be several reasons why consumers did not cut down on chicken consumption. For example, it cannot be ruled out that they do not have a threshold at which point they would become price sensitive, but be careful of the scope: “had no effect” means we are concerned only with the periods in question (the past). Perhaps, also, they are not purchasing chicken for its intrinsic qualities…

Scan each answer choice by eliminating progressively each “wrong” answer to finish with the “best” answer:

(C) establishes that this is not the case, that chicken is not simply being substituted for an even more expensive commodity, and this is vital to the argument. We would still have no way of verifying or falsifying the conclusion regardless of whether (A) or (B) was true, so those choices are wrong, and consumers might still be price-sensitive even if they were richer. (D) makes an extreme statement that goes outside the scope of the argument; we are not concerned with generalities, only chicken. (E) adds a third data point but it need not be true for the argument to hold; we are concerned only with the periods in question.

nakulvarma · Answer

Why is option A incorrect. It gives good explanation.

Information in option-A is important because if inflation accounted for the entire increase in chicken prices, then the real prices (adjusted for inflation) would remain the same between the two periods. In such a case, consumers would not be experiencing a true increase in chicken prices, and therefore the conclusion that rising prices have no effect on consumers' decisions would be more valid

Posted from my mobile device

andrenoble · Answer

It's only true if wages increased inline with inflation / CPI, which may not be the case.

ArmaanBajaj · Answer

Can someone explain this logically

KarishmaB · Answer

CR questions from unknown sources are typically not great. The question stem itself "more properly drawn" is not something seen in GMAT. A conclusion is either properly drawn or not properly drawn. How can it be "more properly" drawn? 
If properly drawn, we look for a sufficient assumption. Else we look for a strengthener.

Then without even knowing what it is that we are looking for, making any comments is useless. Further, their answer relies on the assumption that people know that beef is far more expensive than chicken. An objective question of an international test cannot expect that.

Just ignore.

guddo · Answer

The average price of chicken in the United States was $1.50 per pound from 1995 to 1999 and $2.00 per pound from 2000 to 2004, an increase of about 33 percent. Meanwhile, the average consumption of chicken per capita per year from 1995 to 1999 was 100 pounds; the corresponding figure for 2000 to 2004 was the same. It seems, then, that rising chicken prices have no effect on consumers’ decisions.
 
 The conclusion above would be more properly drawn if we knew that:

The argument says chicken became more expensive, but people ate the same amount of chicken. So it concludes that chicken prices did not affect consumer decisions.  The key support  would show that consumers had a real alternative to chicken, but still did not reduce chicken consumption.

(A) Inflation did not increase the price index by as much as 33 percent from the first period to the second and thereby make the real prices between the two periods equal.

This helps somewhat because it shows the price increase was real, not just inflation. But it does not address whether consumers had practical alternatives to chicken.

(B) Average per capita income in the United States was less than 33 percent higher from 2000 to 2004 than from 1995 to 1999.

This also helps somewhat. If income did not rise as much as chicken prices, chicken became less affordable. But this still does not test whether consumers could switch to another food.

(C) The average price of beef during 2000 to 2004 was not higher than it was from 1994 to 1999, so that consumers looked for alternatives.

This is correct. If chicken became more expensive but beef did not, then consumers had an available  substitute . If they still kept eating the same amount of chicken, that better supports the idea that higher chicken prices did not affect their decisions.

(D) In general, American consumers are price-insensitive.

This is too broad. The argument is about chicken specifically, not all consumer behavior.

(E) From 2005 to 2009, the average price of chicken in the United States will reach $2.67 per pound but the average consumption of chicken per capita per year will remain 100 pounds.

This is not needed. A future prediction does not explain the already observed pattern from 1995 to 2004.

Answer: (C)

The average price of chicken in the United States

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

The average price of chicken in the United States

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