Psychologist: On average, people who read at least one book a month

Question

Psychologist: On average, people who read at least one book a month for pleasure go far more frequently to museums, concerts, and sporting events than do people who read less than one book a year. This shows that recreational reading tends to promote a healthy interest in other social and cultural activities.

The psychologist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

(A) It overlooks the possibility that the more time one spends on recreational reading, on average, the less time will remain available for other social and cultural activities.

(B) It takes for granted that the greater a person's level of interest in an activity, the more often the person participates in that activity.

(C) It overlooks the possibility that two or more phenomena may tend to occur together even if none of those phenomena causally contributes to any of the others

(D) It fails to adequately address the possibility that, even if one phenomenon tends to produce a certain effect, other phenomena may also contribute to that effect.

(E) It takes for granted that frequent attendance of museums, concerts, and sporting events does not tend to reduce interest in recreational reading.

Kimberly77 · Answer

Could any expert explain why is C correct and not A? Thanks

HenryHai · Answer

This is a causality question
I go with (C) because it proves that there is possibility of reversal causality in this question. Author did not prove well whether any other causes lead to the frequency of joining social and cultural events and to the habit of reading book.
I ruled out (A) because it is incorrect when it lists : "the more time one spends on recreational reading, on average, the less time will remain available for other social and cultural activities". This sentence is not belong to our argument. Our argument is "the more time one spends on recreational reading, on average, the more time they spend on other social and cultural activities". Thus, this is irrelevant answer to our argument.
Hope it helps

Sgomez53 · Answer

Can someone explain the difference between C and D. I understand they are slightly different but I believe both weaken the argument in a comparable ways.

Invincible_147 · Answer

Yes, both options weaken the argument; however, option C is a stronger weakening factor than option D.Option C suggests that the conclusion is incorrect because it could simply be a correlation, not causation, between recreational book reading and event attendance. This directly challenges the psychologist's main argument, which claims that recreational reading promotes a healthy interest in social and cultural activities.On the other hand, option D suggests the possibility of a third factor contributing to the increased event attendance among recreational readers. While this does introduce doubt, it only moderately weakens the argument by implying there may be other influences at play, without challenging the core reasoning as strongly as option C does.
Therefore, option C is a more effective weakening factor, as it attacks the fundamental reasoning of the argument, which asserts that recreational reading directly promotes social and cultural engagement.

Psychologist: On average, people who read at least one book a month

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

Psychologist: On average, people who read at least one book a month

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