Although it is sometimes claimed that consuming caffeine at high level

Question

Although it is sometimes claimed that consuming caffeine at high levels does not cause insomnia, statistical evidence shows that it does. Study after study has found that people with high levels of caffeine consumption from beverages such as coffee, tea, and soft drinks are far more likely to suffer from insomnia than people who consume little or no caffeine.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Consumption of caffeine from sources other than coffee, tea, and soft drinks is unlikely to cause insomnia.

B. Caffeine consumption is the only commonly occurring cause of insomnia.

C. People suffering from insomnia do not typically respond to their lack of sleep by consuming much more caffeine than they would if they did not suffer from insomnia.

D. The only evidence available to show whether caffeine causes insomnia is statistical evidence showing correlations between caffeine consumption and insomnia.

E. Anyone who regularly consumes caffeine in more than moderate quantities will suffer from insomnia.

Similar/Related question: https://gmatclub.com/forum/although-it- ... 24708.html

Show Answer

Official Answer

C

Using official mocks already? Add GMAT Club Tests for harder practice, analytics, and explanations without overlapping Official Guide or official mock questions.
Try it now →

ChrisLele · Accepted Answer

This is a causality argument: too much coffee consumption leads to insomnia. However, what if those in the study were already suffering from insomnia, and in order to cope with it (I think we've all been here

), they began to imbibe large amounts of caffeine? Therefore, in order for the argument to hold true, we have to discount the possibility that sleep deprivation turned the insomniacs into caffeine drinkers. A. Consumption of caffeine from sources other than coffee, tea, and soft drinks is unlikely to cause insomnia. We are focused on the link between caffeine and insomnia, not on caffeine across different beverages (which conceivably could differ dramatically). B. Caffeine consumption is the only commonly occurring cause of insomnia. Even if this is the case, the argument does not depend on this statement. There could be other commonly occurring causes of insomnia the argument can still hold true: those who drink caffeine are likely to suffer from insomnia. C. People suffering from insomnia do not typically respond to their lack of sleep by consuming much more caffeine than they would if they did not suffer from insomnia. Here we have it: poor insomniacs, innocent in the sin of caffeine consumption

, suddenly began consuming it in large quantities. If that is the case, then we cannot say that caffeine causes insomnia; rather insomnia causes caffeine consumption. D. The only evidence available to show whether caffeine causes insomnia is statistical evidence showing correlations between caffeine consumption and insomnia. The argument does not depend on the statistical evidence mentioned in the argument. There could be other forms of evidence that show the link between caffeine and insomnia. If so, the existence of that new evidence would in no way undermine the argument. E. Anyone who regularly consumes caffeine in more than moderate quantities will suffer from insomnia. The argument simply claims a link between caffeine consumption and insomnia. It does not rely on the assumption that anyone who consumes excessive caffeine will suddenly become a red-eyed ranting insomniac. Answer: C. Hope that helps!

macjas · Answer

My guess is C. If C was false that would mean that many insomniacs drink a lot of coffee i.e insomnia possibly leads to coffee drinking and not coffee drinking possibly leads to insomnia. This explains the data in the stats as well as demonstrates that the author misinterpreted the data.

What's the OA?

What's the OA?

bschooladmit · Answer

C for me as well.

If C is negated: 
People suffering from insomnia  do  typically respond to their lack of sleep by consuming much more caffeine than they would if they did not suffer from insomnia. 
Then, the argument falls apart because it implies that, insomnia hence coffee & not coffee hence insomnia.

sananoor · Answer

C for me as it says that people suffering from Insomnia do not respond to their Insomnia through drinking more coffee or tea...it means that people taking coffee or tea in excess were not those who developed Insomnia Before taking coffee in excess. In other words, this option rule out that Insomnia leads to excess intake of Caffeine.
Argument says: A causes B--->we have to make sure that there isn't another thing causing B or its B that causes A.
Option C rule out the 2nd option that B causing A and making it confirm that A causing B.
Hope its clear

ravigupta2912 · Answer

C fits in that classic framework of eliminating the possibility that it isn’t actually insomnia which is causing high caffeine consumption. Because if that happens then the conclusion breaks down.

Posted from my mobile device

hmayank83 · Answer

As per the argument caffeine consumption causes insomnia.
Cause -> caffeine consumption Effect ->Insomnia
 A. Consumption of caffeine from sources other than coffee, tea, and soft drinks is unlikely to cause insomnia.

We are not concerned with the source of caffeine.

B. Caffeine consumption is the only commonly occurring cause of insomnia.

The conclusion does not depend on this statement.We are not concerned with the other commonly occurring cause of insomnia.

C. People suffering from insomnia do not typically respond to their lack of sleep by consuming much more caffeine

than they would if they did not suffer from insomnia.

This defends the argument by making it clear that the cause and effect relationship is not reversed.
 Negation technique: People suffering from insomnia respond to their lack of sleep by consuming much more caffeine
This will break the argument by attacking the author's reasoning that the cause effect relationship can be reversed
 
 D. The only evidence available to show whether caffeine causes insomnia is statistical evidence showing correlations

between caffeine consumption and insomnia.
 
The argument does not depend on the statistical evidence mentioned in the argument. Rather it focuses more on the fact that insomnia(effect) is due to caffeine consumption(cause)

E. Anyone who regularly consumes caffeine in more than moderate quantities will suffer from insomnia.

This statement does not strengthen or defend the reasoning in any way. Hence it can't be the assumption.

Answer: C.

SergejK · Answer

I answered this correctly through elimination. I am just not sure I 100% understand how the argument is constructed. If we are asked for the assumption of the argument, we are not asked for the underlying assumption of the conclusion, right? Otherwise "statistical evidence shows that it does" would have to be the conclusion. However, doesn't it present facts? Or because it is a counter-position to the claim that caffeine does not cause insomnia and hence provides an interpretation of many studies, therefore IS the conclusion of the argument? In the context of the passage "statistical evidence shows that it does" looks like the conclusion, considering that it is based on the interpretation of the many studies. But isolated, this part of the first sentence looks rather like part of the premise. Is the reason that it takes an opposing position the reason that it can be viewed as what the argument is trying to say?

Or is the actual conclusion missing here and only implied? Similarly to  this  boldfaced question, we should focus on what the argument is about. As here also, like in the boldfaced question, an opposing position is attacked, the conclusion would then be the opposite of the attacked position, correct? This actually makes more sense as "statistical evidence shows that it does" can only function as a support for the conclusion as it presents evidence interpretation and not a conclusion. I think I'm getting there, just would appreciate support with this question.

PS: I got it now:

There is methodology to those kind of questions. If the weight of counter premises weighs more than the initial position that the argument is clearly opposing, it implies that the argument takes the position of the data rather than of an unsupported position. It becomes clear that the argument seeks to establish that the initial statement is wrong and that there is a clear causality between coffee causing insomnia. The assumption is then that there is no other causal explanation possible. And we are actually not allowed to question the conclusion, saying that it is wrong. However, we are allowed to question the assumption that no other causal explanation is possible. C clearly presents a reversed causality. By negating this causality it presents the underlying assumption. As we are not trying to weaken our argument, it is the correct answer choice.

keshubhturakhia · Answer

Although it is sometimes claimed that consuming caffeine at high level

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

Although it is sometimes claimed that consuming caffeine at high level

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