For the first time in history, more televisions than people can be fou

Question

For the first time in history, more televisions than people can be found in American households. According to recent research, the average household has 2.55 residents and contains 2.73 televisions. However, by employing such costly manufacturing processes as plasma technology and flat screens, televisions are becoming too expensive for the typical consumer. As a result, the average number of residents per household will again surpass the number of televisions.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument above?

1) House parties at which numerous individuals gather to view popular television shows on one television set have increased three hundred percent during the past year.

2) More than one million legal immigrants enter the United States each year.

3) New devices such as video-enabled personal digital assistants and music players are increasingly purchased for use as a primary source of information and entertainment.

4) As new technologies become more commonplace, manufacturing and retail costs normally decline.

5) As a result of technological advances, new televisions are increasingly enabled with some features, such as Internet browsing, traditionally associated with other household devices.

i don't agree with the OA or OE! (forces us to make additional assumption)
please explain your answers, thanks

ronron · Answer

I would go for 3 (or C) 
If you consider television a primary source of information and entertainment , handheld devices can be considered a subsitute for televisions

It's far fetched but is the only acceptable answer to me


1-people from houseparties are not residents
2-no support for argument 
4-weakens argument, lower cost, higher demand
5-no support

What's the source of this question?

bkk145 · Answer

C from me
My assumption: not many people will not buy new TV as much
B is irrelevant
D and E is actually weakens the argument
A is irrelevant.

b14kumar · Answer

Among all options given, only C makes sense though it has an underlying assumption that TV were the primary source of information and entertainment.

So C.

- Brajesh

GMATBLACKBELT · Answer

I say C.

We are tryin to support the conclusion that ppl will again outnumber tvs.

A: Irrelevant. People could still own lots of TVs
B: Irrelevant. These immigrants could buy TVs. and whose to say these immigrants are apart of the offical population etc...
D: This weakens the conclusion.
E: Irrelevant. Doesn't say anything about drop in TVs. 

C says that people will turn to other forms of electronics for entertainment, thus probably dropping the % of TV's.

It does require some bit of an additional assumption, but it supports the argument the best.

rishi2377 · Answer

I find A as the best option.

Reason: The argument behind conclusion is that less ppl are purchasing TV 'cause TV' has become too costly to purchase for a typical consumer.
televisions are becoming too expensive for the typical consumer. As a result, the average number of residents per household will again surpass the number of televisions.

So to strenghten the argument, correct answer will suggest that ppl are unwillingly refraining from purchasing new TV set ( not by choice).

Now look at options:

B. Too weak. At best it suggests that number of resident is increasing, nothing else. OUT

C. Eyecatcher for sure BUT..
First, it doesn't suggest that ppl are getting same kind of entertainment and information services as they get on TV.
TV word isn't even mentioned in this option.
Second, C suggest that ppl are not buying TV sets by choice not because they cant afford it ( money factor).
Apart from that it doesn't mention that increase in the sale of new devices will continue in future and question ask you to prove that in future number of viewers will surpass number of TV set.

D. Crap.

E. Again crap.

Now my selection, A.

Number of household parties has increased 300%.To me, It is too large an increase to assume that this is because of some trend. It suggests that ppl are very much willing to watch shows on TV sets but since they dont have one they are attending such household parties.

Anyway, this is my reasoning. If OA isn't A, and if I encounter this question on GMAT then I would surely have atleast one wrong that means no 800 :p

beckee529 · Answer

hi guys.. the OA is C. I didn't like any of their answer choices. I got this from MGMAT crit reasoning question bank. here is the OE they give (which I do not agree with)

 Although televisions currently outnumber residents in the average American household, the argument concludes that this fact will soon be reversed.  The correct answer choice must strengthen the conclusion that the average household will again contain more residents than television sets .   <- agreed 

(A) This choice is irrelevant to the conclusion. The fact that individuals increasingly enjoy watching popular shows in the company of others does not affect how many televisions these individuals possess in their places of residence.

(B) This choice simply expresses a fact about U.S. demographics. However, nothing indicates that these immigrants alter the purchasing behavior of televisions by American consumers.

(C) CORRECT. This choice indicates that new devices are replacing the main function of the television: a primary source of information and entertainment. This fact, in combination with the increasing expense of television sets, supports the conclusion that  fewer televisions will be purchased in the future .  <- i don't agree with that bold part 

(D) This choice weakens the conclusion by undermining a premise on which the conclusion is based. If retail costs for televisions were to decline, consumers would not be less likely to purchase televisions in the future.

(E) This choice is irrelevant to the argument. Even if televisions take on some roles associated with other household devices, we cannot claim that there will be fewer television sets per household as a result; indeed, there may be more television sets per household, if television sets can do a greater variety of tasks.

i guess C is the best out of the bunch =\

Chembeti · Answer

It is absolutely fine because the question stem states "which of the following,  IF TRUE ..." meaning, you can assume they are FACTS and can take for granted.

manalq8 · Answer

+1 for C. if other devices are used for intertainment and information, then number of televisions used will decline and eventually number of people per house will increase

monir6000 · Answer

For the first time in history, more televisions than people can be found in American households. According to recent research, the average household has 2.55 residents and contains 2.73 televisions. However, by employing such costly manufacturing processes as plasma technology and flat screens, televisions are becoming too expensive for the typical consumer. As a result, the average number of residents per household will again surpass the number of televisions.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument above?

A. House parties at which numerous individuals gather to view popular television shows on one television set have increased three hundred percent during the past year.

B. More than one million legal immigrants enter the United States each year.

C. New devices such as video-enabled personal digital assistants and music players are increasingly purchased for use as a primary source of information and entertainment.

D. As new technologies become more commonplace, manufacturing and retail costs normally decline.

E. As a result of technological advances, new televisions are increasingly enabled with some features, such as Internet browsing, traditionally associated with other household devices.

ganeshpraveen4 · Answer

I still think it should be E

whole point is "employing costly manufacturing processes like plasma technology and flat screens, televisions are becoming too expensive for the typical consumer".

Now E suggests,
As a result of technological advances, new televisions are increasingly enabled with some features, such as Internet browsing, traditionally associated with other household devices.

new features in the TV can make it more expensive and leads to lower purchase by the customers.

this looks more close to the argument at hand than C..
What say??

GyanOne · Answer

How can the average number of residents per household surpass the average number of televisions per household? If the average number of residents per household go up, or if the average number of televisions per household go down.

A is irrelevant. D and E actually oppose the argument, so they are out.

Between B and C, C wins because it clearly establishes how the average number of televisions per household can go down (people are buying other electronic devices instead). It also ties in neatly with the point that televisions are becoming too expensive (so people will look for other options).

Although B establishes how the average number of people per household may increases, it is very vague.

C it is.

echoangel911 · Answer

New devices such as video-enabled personal digital assistants and music players are increasingly purchased for use as a primary source of information and entertainment.

C is best since people would use these devices instead of TV.

holidevil · Answer

I too choose C. Below is my reasoning:

A. House parties at which numerous individuals gather to view popular television shows on one television set have increased three hundred percent during the past year. -  At first, I considered it a contender. If people start watching programs together, it will lead to reduction of purchase of new TV sets. However, it suffers from the following:
1. There is significant rise in such households, but the base figure is not given. It may be that only 10 in million households were doing such parties and now the number rises by 300% to 40. Still the number is insignificant to make any dent to the conclusion.
2. People may watch only favorite programs together but still own TV in their homes for private shows or less popular shows.

B. More than one million legal immigrants enter the United States each year.
  @Gyan  - Can you tell me how did you take it as contender? Does it mean that a family of 4 enters the country and buys a single TV set. Such new combination will change the ratio in favor of avg. number of people in households. Is that the reasoning employed by you?

C. New devices such as video-enabled personal digital assistants and music players are increasingly purchased for use as a primary source of information and entertainment.
  @Gyan  - You mentioned that the new devices are cheaper. Nowhere does the choice mention such price difference.

D. As new technologies become more commonplace, manufacturing and retail costs normally decline. -  It actually weakens the argument. Declining prices will push the ratio in the favor of TV sets

E. As a result of technological advances, new televisions are increasingly enabled with some features, such as Internet browsing, traditionally associated with other household devices. -  As for D

Cares · Answer

It is a stretch but he is saying that if the total population increases (+1 million people) but we  assume  that the number of TV sets stay static...the number of TVs per household will decrease while the number of people per household will increase. We have to make several assumptions here which makes it the wrong answer.

TGC · Answer

(C).New devices such as video-enabled personal digital assistants and music players are increasingly purchased for use as a  primary  source of information and entertainment.

No where it is mentioned that Televisions were primary source of entertainment.Moreover,as television are getting expensive this choice doesn't mention that these devices are cheaper than TV's.

Plz Advice !!!

Poor question IMHO

What is the source?

Phunnie · Answer

IMO B

B. More than one million legal immigrants enter the United States each year.
Let assume People : TV is 1:2 After more than one million legal immigrants enter US, People : TV is 3:2 or 3:1
It's obvious that the ratio of people surpass TV.
Or the keyword is ''average number of residents'' ?? So then, how can I fix this?
What am I missing here?

And accroding to what TGC stated(comment above) that there was not mentioned that TV was primary source of information and entertainment. So how can we conclude that C is the stronger answer?

Thanks

monirjewel · Answer

C for me. It supports by adding additional information that people will not buy TV more becaz New devices such as video-enabled personal digital assistants and music players are increasingly purchased.

kinjiGC · Answer

Not a very good rounded question - I must say.

Option C) is the best of the lot and I guess only POE can be used to arrive at this answer.

Option A) : Out of scope as House parties are discussed. Doesn't affect the argument at all.
Option B) Totally Out of scope.
Option D) Opposes the argument.
Option E) Out of scope.

Option C) Some assumptions are to be made. better than the rest.

Seriously source is ManhattanGMAT?

krishna789 · Answer

Need a detailed explanation e-GMATers please help. 
How can we imply that televisions are the primary source of entertainment?
How the increase in other entertainment gadgets leads to decrease in average number of television sets per household?

For the first time in history, more televisions than people can be fou

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

For the first time in history, more televisions than people can be fou

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