BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Source : GMAT PREP :New Q for old stimuli.

Expert replies
by himu » Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:47 pm
In the year following an eight-cent increase in the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes, sales of cigarettes fell ten percent. In contrast, in the year prior to the tax increase, sales had fallen one percent. The volume of cigarette sales is therefore strongly related to the after-tax price of a pack of cigarettes.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument above?
A. During the second year after the tax increase, cigarette sales increased by a significant amount.
B. The information available to consumers on the health risks of smoking remained largely unchanged in the period before and after the tax increase.
C. Most consumers were unaware that the tax on cigarettes was going to increase.
D. During the year following the cigarette tax increase, many consumers had less income, in inflation-adjusted dollars, than they had had in the previous year.
E. During the year after the tax increase, there was a greater variety of cigarettes on the market than there had been during the previous year.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:51 pm
himu wrote:In the year following an eight-cent increase in the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes, sales of cigarettes fell ten percent. In contrast, in the year prior to the tax increase, sales had fallen one percent. The volume of cigarette sales is therefore strongly related to the after-tax price of a pack of cigarettes.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument above?
Certain patterns recur regularly in CR - possibly the most common argument form is causation.

We can paraphrase this entire argument as "the increase in price is responsible for the decrease in sales".

The most common ways to strengthen a causal argument are:
1) eliminate alternative causes; and
2) provide more evidence supporting the relationship.

On this question, (B) falls into the first category of strengthener. What's another reason why sales may have dropped? Because people became more aware that cigarettes were bad for them. (B) eliminates that possibility, thereby making it more likely that the author's explanation is correct.

If we're asked to weaken a causal argument, the two most common ways to do so are:
1) suggest an alternative cause; and
2) break the link between the cause and effect (i.e. suggest that the two are unrelated).

A much less-common third way to weaken is:
3) show that the author may have cause and effect backwards.

Stuart
Image

Stuart Kovinsky | Kaplan GMAT Faculty | Toronto

Kaplan Exclusive: The Official Test Day Experience | Ready to Take a Free Practice Test? | Kaplan/Beat the GMAT Member Discount
BTG100 for $100 off a full course
Join the discussion

by himu » Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:55 pm
Thanks so much Stuart :)
Join the discussion

by Abhishek009 » Wed Dec 11, 2013 10:56 am
himu wrote:In the year following an eight-cent increase in the federal tax on a pack of cigarettes, sales of cigarettes fell ten percent. In contrast, in the year prior to the tax increase, sales had fallen one percent. The volume of cigarette sales is therefore strongly related to the after-tax price of a pack of cigarettes.
1. 8 % Fed tax reduced consumption by 10%

2. Before increasing Tax consumption reduced 1%

3. Sale of Cigarettes is strongly related to after Tax Price per pack.


Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument above?

We simply have to support the red highlighted conclusion..


A. During the second year after the tax increase, cigarette sales increased by a significant amount.

Irrelevant , not supporting the argument...

B. The information available to consumers on the health risks of smoking remained largely unchanged in the period before and after the tax increase.

Ok , this is just a general background of the scenario suggesting things remained the same except Taxation , which affected the consumption behaviour...

This can be an answer choice..

C. Most consumers were unaware that the tax on cigarettes was going to increase.

So ? What does it result in , consumption of cigarettes decreased and this option provides no connection ...

D. During the year following the cigarette tax increase, many consumers had less income, in inflation-adjusted dollars, than they had had in the previous year.

This is weakening the argument , suggesting that something else was responsible for the decline in sale of Cigarettes , other than Taxation...

This option can be rejected.

E. During the year after the tax increase, there was a greater variety of cigarettes on the market than there had been during the previous year.

Out of scope ...[/u]
Abhishek
Join the discussion