The availability of television reduces the amount of reading children

Question

The availability of television reduces the amount of reading children do. When television is made unavailable, a nearly universal increase in reading, both by parents and by children, is reported. When television is available again, the level of reading by both parents and children relapses to its previous level.

The reasoning in which one of the following is most similar to the reasoning above?

(A) Whenever the money supply in an economy fluctuates, interest rates tend to fluctuate. When the money supply remains constant, interest rates tend to remain stable. Thus, the money supply's remaining constant stabilizes interest rates.

(B) The consumption of candy between meals disrupts a child's appetite at mealtimes. When candy is not consumed, blood sugar declines until mealtime, so the child feels hungry. A child who eats healthy meals feels less desire for candy.

(C) Global warming is caused by increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Furthermore, industrial pollution causes increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. So industrial pollution causes global warming.

(D) Voting behavior is affected by factors other than political candidates' records of political achievement. For example, a candidate who projects confidence will gain votes as a result, whereas a candidate with a supercilious facial expression will lose votes.

(E) Adults read less than they once did because there are so many other activities to divert them. This can be seen from the fact that the more time they spend on such other activities, the less they read. Conversely, the less they read, the more time they spend on such other activities

shekyonline · Answer

A and E are very close.

A wins because:

In the given analogy TV is an  external factor  which determines our behaviour.
 TV = 1, Reading = less; 
TV = 0, Reading = more;

In E, there is no external factor ; we choose to divert ourselves to other activities and we choose to read.
 
A certainly wins.

akela · Answer

Premise: When TV is made unavailable, parents and children read more. Premise: When TV is made available again, parents and children read less. Conclusion: TV reduces the amount of reading children do: TV watching (cause) -> Reduce reading (effect) (A) Premise: when money supply fluctuates, so interest rates fluctuate; Premise: when one money supply is kept constant, the interest rate remains constant. Conclusion: constant money supply stabilizes interest rates: Money supply (cause) -> Interest rates (effect). Correct (B) Premises describe causal relationship, but there is no conclusion. The last sentence looks more like a recommendation. (E) Premise: more time people spend on activities -> the less they read. (A -> B) Premise: Conversely, the less people read -> the more time they spend on other activities (B->A) Conclusion: So, Reading less <-> Doing other stuff (A<-> B)

Thekingmaker · Answer

Yeah this one is a tricky one between A and E , E makes us think that it has a similar reasoning as the argument provided , beware this is gmat and anything is possible on these unknown ground we have to tread highly cautiously we have to figure out why isn;t right also eliminate other irrelevant one's after all this crap expelling , we enter gold rush from there it's only a step away from jackpot , here for that matter it's A .

SMAsh those thumbs up button for no apparent reason , just because life doesn''t have any similar reasoning

SMAsh those thumbs up button for no apparent reason , just because life doesn''t have any similar reasoning

unraveled · Answer

The availability of television reduces the amount of reading children do. When television is made unavailable, a nearly universal increase in reading, both by parents and by children, is reported. When television is available again, the level of reading by both parents and children relapses to its previous level.

The argument flow is as such - 
T lowers R. nT lets to increases in R. T again lead to decrease in R. 
T ---> lower R. nT ---> increased R. T again ----> same lower R.

This is sort of two way relationship between T and R in which one(T) causes(an inference that can be drawn) the other(R) to change.

The reasoning in which one of the following is most similar to the reasoning above?

(A) Whenever the money supply in an economy fluctuates, interest rates tend to fluctuate. When the money supply remains constant, interest rates tend to remain stable. Thus, the money supply's remaining constant stabilizes interest rates. - CORRECT.
M fluctuation causes IR to fluctuate. M(no fluctuation) leads to IR stability. Thus, the conclusion is right that constant M leads to IR's stability.

(B) The consumption of candy between meals disrupts a child's appetite at mealtimes. When candy is not consumed, blood sugar declines until mealtime, so the child feels hungry. A child who eats healthy meals feels less desire for candy. - WRONG. 
CC ---> Appetite disruption. nCC ---> declined BS ---> Hungry child. 
Till this point the option is somewhat fine. However, the conclusion is not backed up by the option. It makes a jump and reverses the relation to make a conclusion.

(C) Global warming is caused by increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Furthermore, industrial pollution causes increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. So industrial pollution causes global warming. - WRONG.
IP ---> increased CO2 ---> GW. 
The option has just one directional flow.

(D) Voting behavior is affected by factors other than political candidates' records of political achievement. For example, a candidate who projects confidence will gain votes as a result, whereas a candidate with a supercilious facial expression will lose votes. - WRONG.
RPA/Other factors ---> VB. An example. No match of flow.

(E) Adults read less than they once did because there are so many other activities to divert them. This can be seen from the fact that the more time they spend on such other activities, the less they read. Conversely, the less they read, the more time they spend on such other activities 
Many activities ---> less R. Reasoning given. Less R ---> More time spent on other activities. Causality is reversed. At best it is similar in structure as B is.

Answer A.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

The availability of television reduces the amount of reading children

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

The availability of television reduces the amount of reading children

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