Critical Reasoning

This one is from MGMAT CAT. Hope I can post the question?

Moderators, Let me know else I will delete my post.

A recent research study of undergraduate students analyzed the effects of music on human emotions. Each of the 200 participants attended at least 1 two-hour concert of classical music per week over the course of 12 weeks of their spring semester. At the end of the experiment, all of the students filled out a questionnaire assessing their emotional state. Based on the results of the questionnaires, all of the 10 students who attended the greatest number of concerts reported lower stress levels and higher satisfaction with their lives. Also, most of the 20 students who attended the fewest number of concerts reported below-average levels of emotional comfort.

Which of the following must be true based on the evidence presented above?
A. Most of the 200 participants improved their emotional state and lowered their stress levels.

B. During each week of the experiment, the participants spent at least 2 hours less on their academic work as a result of concert attendance.

C. Listening to classical music for at least 2 hours per week improves the emotional well-being of the majority of young adults.

D. More than 6 participants attended at least 14 concerts during the course of the experiment.

E. At least some of the students participated in the study in order to gain free access to classical concerts.

What's the answer? And Why ?

Auzbee, IMO C.
Look, here the argument is saying about the positive effect of listening music to youth. According to the argument,

all of the 10 students who attended the greatest number of concerts reported lower stress levels and higher satisfaction with their lives. Also, most of the 20 students who attended the fewest number of concerts reported below-average levels of emotional comfort.

So its not that all the 200 students are benefited from this program. Only those people who attended the program totally, are benefited. So leave A. B and E are really going too far from the argument. So leave them out also. So we are left with C and D. About D, it is not described in the argument about the % of people attended the program. So we are left with C. And IMO C.

Amitava you were close. OA is D
Anyone else want's to explain the reasoning? Sorry about the typo.

Auzbee:

'Also, most of the 20 students who attended the fewest number of concerts reported below-average levels of emotional comfort. '

So even if they reported below-average levels of emotional comfort, they still derived some sort of emotional comfort. Hence everyone who attended the program got some benefit which is sort of implied in (C).

Let me know if this makes sense.

I am sorry the OA is D.

Auzbee getting confused! How come D can be? Guys I think we need more input ...

There are 10 students who have attended maximum number of classes which must be more than 12. There must be 20 students who attended least number of concerts which should be equal to 12 if not more. So the remaining 400-12-20 students should have attended the concert b/w the numbers of 12 and the number attended by top 10 students. So, the top 10 should have atleast attended 14 classes. Hence it is D.

And the reason why it can not be C is that, the music might not be the cause for reducing the stress among these 10 ppl who attended the maximum number of concerts. The passage does not specify what was the mental state of all the participants before the experiment. It could also be that, these 10 individuals are originally more relaxed and that might be the reason why they attended the maximum number of concerts.

Thanks v_shiv and Sujay! It is not an easy one, what do u say guys?

I went with D because I eliminated A,B,C and E.

We can't conclude C because there may be majority of students out there like 150 students who went to the concert at least 2 hrs and still are dissatisfied. The argument doesn't preclude this possibility and hence the answer can't be C. Hence I went with D although I didn't get those numbers (I mean the number 6 from "more than 6 attendted at least 14 concerts, the word greatest implies at least 3 groups of people but how do we get 6?).

Calista.

As v_shiv pointed out, we know that there's at least 3 groups of students:

(1) the "top 10"
(2) the "bottom 20"
(3) the rest

We know that everyone attended at least 12 2 hour concerts. So, group (2) attended at least 12. That means that group 3, who we know attended more concerts and group 2, must have attended at least 13 concerts. Therefore group 1, who attended more concerts than group 3, must have attended at least 14 concerts.

So, we can conclude that at least 10 people attended at least 14 concerts.

If at least 10 people attended at least 14 concerts, then "more than 6" people definitely attended at least 14 concerts (since 10 > 6).

Remember: the correct answer to an inference question is something that must be true based on one or more statements in the stimulus. The answer doesn't have to be the big conclusion of the argument or even the greatest conclusion possibly drawn (for example, (d) would also have been correct if it said "more than 9 ...").

A number of the other choices fall into the "could be true" category, but that's not what we're looking for in an inference question.

i think is C