Last visit was: 24 Apr 2026, 15:47 It is currently 24 Apr 2026, 15:47
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
805+ (Hard)|   Non-Math Related|         
User avatar
SundayRoast
User avatar
Joined: 29 Oct 2024
Last visit: 23 Jul 2025
Posts: 40
Own Kudos:
7
 [2]
Given Kudos: 11
Posts: 40
Kudos: 7
 [2]
­It has been proposed that teenagers aged 10 to 15 years be restricted 08 Mar 2025, 10:16
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The OG explanation for this question is directly contradictory to this question. https://gmatclub.com/forum/does-it-bene ... 44DycCRslN
User avatar
lancer4444
User avatar
Joined: 28 Oct 2024
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 12
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 598
Posts: 12
Kudos: 2
­It has been proposed that teenagers aged 10 to 15 years be restricted 03 Apr 2025, 10:12
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
10 year old teenagers? this question is a joke on so many levels lol.
User avatar
D3N0
User avatar
Joined: 21 Jan 2015
Last visit: 24 Apr 2026
Posts: 585
Own Kudos:
607
Given Kudos: 132
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Technology
Schools: Smeal'21 (WD) Arizona State'21 (A$) Simon '21 (WD)
GMAT 1: 620 Q48 V28
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V35
WE:Operations (Retail: E-commerce)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Smeal'21 (WD) Arizona State'21 (A$) Simon '21 (WD)
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V35
Posts: 585
Kudos: 607
­It has been proposed that teenagers aged 10 to 15 years be restricted 30 Jun 2025, 00:10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I take issue with the Official answer too.
1) Option says: "A peer-reviewed study indicates a 23% increase in the incidence of..." , But the answer usage "This statement cites a study that found an association between social-media use by teenagers 10 to 15 years, and an increase in the incidence of chronic anxiety or depression among 23% of the minors observed in the study.
The 23% use here has a different meaning (in both the question and the explanation)

2) I also think that if someone has to find meaning in something significant, it should be at least 50% (just saying) I mean we can count even 1% as substantial, but the question has to clarify that.
How would 1% be significant, you ask? Think of 1% of the world population getting Covid (I pray not). That is significant.
However, as pointed aout before, The 28% of teens in statement 2 would be hurt by the restriction and 28% may be a significant number. However, this says nothing of the other 72% of teens. We are given no information as to if they're helped, harmed, or unaffected.

So, yes. I chose E too.
User avatar
fsisto
User avatar
Joined: 01 Dec 2023
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 2
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 2
Kudos: 0
­It has been proposed that teenagers aged 10 to 15 years be restricted 13 Jul 2025, 14:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
✅ (1) Is correlation:
"A peer-reviewed study indicates a 23% increase in the incidence of chronic anxiety or depression among teenagers aged 10 to 15 years who average 2 or more hours per day engaging with social media."
Here’s why this is correlation:
• The sentence says there's an increase in anxiety/depression among teens who use social media a lot.
• It does not say social media causes anxiety — just that they appear together.
• The verb "indicates" is neutral; it suggests an observation, not a proven cause.
• It could be that teens with anxiety are using social media more to cope — we don’t know which direction the effect goes.
🔍 Imagine seeing clouds and people carrying umbrellas. They're connected (correlated), but clouds don’t cause umbrellas — rain does!
✅ (2) Is causation:
"Certain kinds of engagement with social media averaging 2 or more hours per day by teenagers aged 10 to 15 years lead in about 28% of cases to meaningful friendships and social and emotional learning..."
Here’s why this is causation:
• The key verb here is "lead" — it shows a direct result.
• The structure tells us social media behavior produces valuable outcomes (friendships, emotional learning).
• It implies that the effect (positive development) is a result of the action (social media use).
• Even though it’s still a bit cautious ("28% of cases"), the language clearly shows a cause-effect relationship.
User avatar
bishal128
User avatar
Joined: 30 May 2025
Last visit: 18 Mar 2026
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 15
Kudos: 3
­It has been proposed that teenagers aged 10 to 15 years be restricted 18 Sep 2025, 21:56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Well, in the second statement the word "Certain kinds of engagement with social media.." indicates that it is considering a narrow use of social media based on which the causal inference is made so as to restrict benefit of around 28%. What if this "Certain kinds of engagements" do not entail broader use of social media, and the population of the target age group is small enough not to make it feasible for generalization. The assumption on making answer choice "B" would only be justified if it is assumed that "Certain Kinds of Engagements" entails sufficiently large scenario of social media use and is expected to produce this result with the sufficiently large population representative enough to produce the inductive implication that it is what represent the larger population. I believe in the absence of strong evidence and argument not supporting the same, both approach of (presence or absence) of such assumption is invalid. Thus, with this benefit of doubt, neither of the statement is capable of sufficiently answering the statement. (My Answer Choice was E)
GMATinsight

­OFFICIAL EXPLANATIONInference

(1) This statement cites a study that found an association between social-media use by teenagers 10 to 15 years and an increase in the incidence of chronic anxiety or depression among 23% of the minors observed in the study. A key word here is association: It should be noted that this does not prove a cause-effect relationship, even if the study could motivate further investigation to see whether a causal mechanism could be identified. Even if a causal mechanism were identified, it could turn out that the use of social media was at least in part an effect of chronic anxiety or depression: Some teenagers might resort to social media use as a kind of escape mechanism. We should conclude that the information provided (even if the validity of the study is assumed) does not provide sufficient information to show definitively that the proposed restriction would result in developmental or health benefits for minors aged 10 to 15 years. The conclusion is that (1) is not sufficient alone; NOT sufficient.

(2) This statement indicates that use of social media by teens aged 10 to 15 years results in significant developmental benefits for 28% of teens in that age group. In other words, it indicates that social-media use by these teens causally contributes to a developmentally valuable effect. This implies that restriction of their social media use risks depriving a significant number of teens of the benefits resulting from their social-media use. So we can conclude that (2) is sufficient alone to provide a negative answer to the question posed; SUFFICIENT.

The correct answer is B; statement 2 alone is sufficient.
Show more
User avatar
GMATCoachBen
User avatar
Joined: 21 Mar 2017
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 463
Own Kudos:
3,063
Given Kudos: 215
Status:Professional GMAT Trainer
Affiliations: GMAT Coach
Location: United States (WA)
GMAT Focus 1: 775 Q87 V90 DI88 (Online)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V44
GMAT 2: 770 Q51 V44
GMAT 3: 770 Q50 V44
GMAT 4: 770 Q50 V45 (Online)
GMAT 5: 780 Q51 V48
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 775 Q87 V90 DI88 (Online)
GMAT 5: 780 Q51 V48
Posts: 463
Kudos: 3,063
­It has been proposed that teenagers aged 10 to 15 years be restricted 05 Feb 2026, 21:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This analysis is excellent: "What about the other 72%?"

The word "overall" is also very important to notice. In fact, the official explanation correctly highlights "overall" as an essential word in another OG DS non-math question.

Some of these OG DS non-math questions are severely flawed and it's disappointing.
NotoriousGMATMan


The primary issue I take with this logic is that the question is asking if a significant number of teens would benefit from the restriction, not if a significant number of teens would be harmed by the restriction.
The 28% of teens in statement 2 would be hurt by the restriction and 28% may be a significant number. However, this says nothing of the other 72% of teens. We are given no information as to if they're helped, harmed, or unaffected.
The group of 28% being harmed does not preclude the group of 72% (or multiple % groups therein) from being helped.
Surely hypothetical information that the other 72%, a more significant number, would instead benefit greatly from the restriction would be pertinent. We don't know because this only addresses the 28%.

Imagine a real world scenario where you're asked to answer this stem and given the info in statement 2. The first thing you would ask is, "what about the other 72%?"

Additionally, and this may be pedantic, the information in statement 2 tells us that were the restriction in place, some (28%) of the teens would not be able to benefit developmentally in some ways. It says nothing of the overall development of that 28%.


I am new to GMAT and this is my first comment here, please let me know where I'm wrong.
Show more
   1   2 
Moderators:
Bunuel
Math Expert
109818 posts
kingbucky
498 posts
Gmat860sanskar
212 posts