The "suicide wave" that followed the United States stock market crash of October 1929 is more legend than fact. Careful examination of the monthly figures on the causes of death in 1929 shows that the number of suicides in October and in November was comparatively low. In only three other months were the monthly figures lower. During the summer months, when the stock market was flourishing, the number of suicides was substantially higher.
Which one of the following, if true, would best challenge the conclusion of the passage?
(A) The suicide rate is influenced by many psychological, interpersonal, and societal factors during any given historical period.
(B) October and November have almost always had relatively high suicide rates, even during the 1920s and 1930s.
(C) The suicide rate in October and November of 1929 was considerably higher than the average for those months during several preceding and following years.
(D) During the years surrounding the stock market crash, suicide rates were typically lower at the beginning of any calendar year than toward the end of that year.
(E) Because of seasonal differences, the number of suicides in October and November of 1929 would not be expected to be the same as those for other months.
Could you guys please help me understand why option C fares better than option E?
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Suicide Wave
This topic has expert replies
-
gmat_for_life
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:43 am
GMAT/MBA Expert
-
[email protected]
- Elite Legendary Member
- Posts: 10392
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 6:38 pm
- Location: Palo Alto, CA
- Thanked: 2867 times
- Followed by:511 members
- GMAT Score:800
Hi gmat_for_life,
This CR question asks us to challenge (re: weaken) the conclusion of the prompt.
The conclusion is in the first sentence - the 'suicide wave' that supposedly occurred AFTER the stock market crash in October 1929 is more of a myth/legend than a reality (meaning that there weren't appreciably that many more suicides than would be considered 'normal'). As evidence, the author compares that timeframe to other months of that year (when there were more suicides). The part of the argument that we can attack/weaken is "what is considered normal?" We really need some information about typical suicide numbers for that time of year to gauge whether there was an actual 'suicide wave' or not immediately after the stock market crash.
Answer C gives us that comparison, while Answer E offers a reason for why the expected number of suicides would be different - but that doesn't properly address the argument that the stock market crash caused (or didn't cause) relatively more suicides.
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
This CR question asks us to challenge (re: weaken) the conclusion of the prompt.
The conclusion is in the first sentence - the 'suicide wave' that supposedly occurred AFTER the stock market crash in October 1929 is more of a myth/legend than a reality (meaning that there weren't appreciably that many more suicides than would be considered 'normal'). As evidence, the author compares that timeframe to other months of that year (when there were more suicides). The part of the argument that we can attack/weaken is "what is considered normal?" We really need some information about typical suicide numbers for that time of year to gauge whether there was an actual 'suicide wave' or not immediately after the stock market crash.
Answer C gives us that comparison, while Answer E offers a reason for why the expected number of suicides would be different - but that doesn't properly address the argument that the stock market crash caused (or didn't cause) relatively more suicides.
GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich
-
gmat_for_life
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 75
- Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 7:43 am
Thanks a lot Rich!
I think I understood why option C is the correct answer. Option C basically states that the suicides over the months of October and November were considerably lower over the previous and the later years whereas the same were quite high during the year of the crash, an observation clearly stating that something anomalous must have happened that year.
Thanks a lot for your detailed explanation!
Amit
I think I understood why option C is the correct answer. Option C basically states that the suicides over the months of October and November were considerably lower over the previous and the later years whereas the same were quite high during the year of the crash, an observation clearly stating that something anomalous must have happened that year.
Thanks a lot for your detailed explanation!
Amit
