Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Updated on: 24 Jun 2023, 00:41
Originally posted by asquare4120 on 17 Aug 2013, 05:25.
Last edited by Bunuel on 24 Jun 2023, 00:41, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by Bunuel on 24 Jun 2023, 00:41, edited 2 times in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
63% (02:08) correct
37%
(02:25)
wrong
based on 439
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Exposure to the rising values in the stock market, particularly stock in technology companies, entices many families to stop renting and start buying a house. Industry data shows that the proportion of families applying for home mortgages has increased significantly over the past ten years. Therefore, either families have invested in the stock market and experienced larger gains in value, or their desire to buy a house is greater than it was ten years ago.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The number of bankers employed to service home mortgages has not decreased over the past ten years.
(B) Families who buy a house are no more likely than other families to spend their money on a new car.
(C) Families who buy a house are not more likely to get a home mortgage now than they were ten years ago.
(D) Rising values in stocks have not been typical for companies outside of the technology sector.
(E) Family households investing in the stock market do not make up a larger proportion of the population now than they did ten years ago.
OA is ...tell me what is the conclusion and the premise supporting it.
Thanks All.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The number of bankers employed to service home mortgages has not decreased over the past ten years.
(B) Families who buy a house are no more likely than other families to spend their money on a new car.
(C) Families who buy a house are not more likely to get a home mortgage now than they were ten years ago.
(D) Rising values in stocks have not been typical for companies outside of the technology sector.
(E) Family households investing in the stock market do not make up a larger proportion of the population now than they did ten years ago.
OA is ...tell me what is the conclusion and the premise supporting it.
Thanks All.
17 Aug 2013, 09:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
Let me help you with this one.
This is the assumption question. The premise is, "Exposure to the rising values in the stock market, particularly stock in technology companies, entices many families to stop renting and start buying a house. Industry data shows that the proportion of families applying for home mortgages has increased significantly over the past ten years." The conclusion is, "Therefore, either families have invested in the stock market and experienced larger gains in value, or their desire to buy a house is greater than it was ten years ago." The conclusion says that there are only two possibilities to explain why the the proportion of families applying for home mortgages has increased significantly over the past ten years.
(A) The number of bankers employed to service home mortgages has not decreased over the past ten years. Try negating this answer choice. The number of bankers employed to service home mortgages HAS decreased over the past ten years. Does this weaken the argument? No! Therefore, this answer choice is incorrect. Remember that when negated, the correct answer choice always weakens the argument.
(B) Families who buy a house are no more likely than other families to spend their money on a new car. Does the argument need this assumption so that it holds true? No!
(C) Families who buy a house are not more likely to get a home mortgage now than they were ten years ago. This is the correct answer. This assumption plays a defender role by ruling out the other possible explanation besides the TWO possible explanations provided by the argument. Alternatively, when the answer choice is negated, this weakens the argument by stating there is another possible explanation which is Families who buy a house ARE more likely to get a home mortgage now than they were ten years ago
(D) Rising values in stocks have not been typical for companies outside of the technology sector.
(E) Family households investing in the stock market do not make up a larger proportion of the population now than they did ten years ago.
For answer (D) and (E), we do not need each of these as the assumption for the argument to hold true. When you are stuck between two or three choices, try to negate the answer choice. For assumption questions, try to ask yourself whether do you need this for the argument to be valid. Cheer!
This is the assumption question. The premise is, "Exposure to the rising values in the stock market, particularly stock in technology companies, entices many families to stop renting and start buying a house. Industry data shows that the proportion of families applying for home mortgages has increased significantly over the past ten years." The conclusion is, "Therefore, either families have invested in the stock market and experienced larger gains in value, or their desire to buy a house is greater than it was ten years ago." The conclusion says that there are only two possibilities to explain why the the proportion of families applying for home mortgages has increased significantly over the past ten years.
(A) The number of bankers employed to service home mortgages has not decreased over the past ten years. Try negating this answer choice. The number of bankers employed to service home mortgages HAS decreased over the past ten years. Does this weaken the argument? No! Therefore, this answer choice is incorrect. Remember that when negated, the correct answer choice always weakens the argument.
(B) Families who buy a house are no more likely than other families to spend their money on a new car. Does the argument need this assumption so that it holds true? No!
(C) Families who buy a house are not more likely to get a home mortgage now than they were ten years ago. This is the correct answer. This assumption plays a defender role by ruling out the other possible explanation besides the TWO possible explanations provided by the argument. Alternatively, when the answer choice is negated, this weakens the argument by stating there is another possible explanation which is Families who buy a house ARE more likely to get a home mortgage now than they were ten years ago
(D) Rising values in stocks have not been typical for companies outside of the technology sector.
(E) Family households investing in the stock market do not make up a larger proportion of the population now than they did ten years ago.
For answer (D) and (E), we do not need each of these as the assumption for the argument to hold true. When you are stuck between two or three choices, try to negate the answer choice. For assumption questions, try to ask yourself whether do you need this for the argument to be valid. Cheer!
General Discussion
15 May 2023, 08:21
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel could you please help with an explanation for this?
