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.

The management of a magazine

Expert replies
by paes » Fri Jun 25, 2010 9:55 pm
The management of a magazine recently divided its staff of writers into two groups based on whether the writers took more than six breaks daily. A higher percentage of those writers who took more than six breaks a day had problems producing article ideas than did the writers who took six breaks or fewer. The management of the magazine concluded that taking more than six breaks per day causes writers to be less productive.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion above?

(A) The writers who took more than six breaks daily produced, on average, more articles than did the other writers who took less than six breaks daily.

(B) Some of the writers who took fewer than six breaks daily produced large numbers of article ideas.

(C) A diminished output of article ideas was the reason that some of the writers who took fewer than six breaks daily lowered the amount of breaks that they took per day.

(D) Some writers took breaks of only one minute each, while other writers took breaks of up to twenty minutes each.

(E) Frustration over the low production of article ideas caused some of the writers already taking more than six breaks a day to take even more frequent breaks.

OA Later
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by kvcpk » Fri Jun 25, 2010 10:22 pm
IMO C
Join the discussion

by Shawshank » Sat Jun 26, 2010 12:47 am
IMO --C .. For me too,,

Was confused between A and C
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Shawshank Redemtion -- Hope is still alive ...
Join the discussion

by selango » Sat Jun 26, 2010 12:53 am
Options C and E are close.

A states about articles not article ideas.So its out of scope
Join the discussion

by Shawshank » Sat Jun 26, 2010 1:41 am
selango wrote:Options C and E are close.

A states about articles not article ideas.So its out of scope
i think "E" is further strenthening the argument by stating the "writers who are already taking more than 6 breaks are increasing their number of bnreaks further"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Shawshank Redemtion -- Hope is still alive ...
Join the discussion

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:22 am
I pick A.

Option A looks fine to me.
Join the discussion

by selango » Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:24 am
Oh yes...Then option A and C

But option A deals with only number of articles not article ideas.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
Join the discussion

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 26, 2010 2:46 am
selango wrote:Oh yes...Then option A and C

But option A deals with only number of articles not article ideas.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
Since the conclusion of the argument is that taking more than six breaks per day causes writers to be less productive, one way to weaken this argument is to show that people taking more than 6 breaks are more productive than people taking less than 6 breaks. If measure of productivity is number of articles written in one day, then option A weakens the argument in the passage.

I agree, what is the actual measure of productivity (the number of ideas OR the number of articles written) is nowhere mentioned. But compared to other options, A looks better to me.
Join the discussion

by paes » Sat Jun 26, 2010 3:39 am
OA ia A.

But I selected E with following reasoning.

A -> " The writers who took more than six breaks daily produced, on average, more articles"
looking as directly contradicting the premise - " A higher percentage of those writers who took more than six breaks a day had problems producing article ideas than did the writers who took six breaks or fewer"

A weaken choice should not directly contradict the premise.


E : is saying that frustration because of low articles (B) ------> more breaks (A)
while argument is saying that more breaks (A) ----> low articles ( B )

Hence by causal relationship, E is weakning the argument.

Please share your thoughts on my reasoning.
Join the discussion

by gmatmachoman » Sat Jun 26, 2010 3:53 am
Shawshank wrote:IMO --C .. For me too,,

Was confused between A and C

Shawshank bhai,

we know there are 2 groups say A1 & A2

A2: writers who takes less than 6 breaks daily.

C talks more about A2. It no where discuss about A1.(reject C)

Our answer should try to relate A1 & A2 !!

A is a plain causal reversal types!! Pick A
Join the discussion

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:08 am
paes wrote:OA ia A.

But I selected E with following reasoning.

A -> " The writers who took more than six breaks daily produced, on average, more articles"
looking as directly contradicting the premise - " A higher percentage of those writers who took more than six breaks a day had problems producing article ideas than did the writers who took six breaks or fewer"

A weaken choice should not directly contradict the premise.

E : is saying that frustration because of low articles (B) ------> more breaks (A)
while argument is saying that more breaks (A) ----> low articles ( B )

Hence by causal relationship, E is weakning the argument.

Please share your thoughts on my reasoning.
If option E would have been - Frustration over the low production of article ideas caused some of the writers to take more than 6 breaks - then I would have selected E since it is showing that the cause of less productivity is frustration not more breaks.

But since E is talking about people who are already taking more 6 breaks, I don't think it fits as a right answer here. Here more than 6 breaks could be the cause of both less productivity and frustration.

Hope that helps..
Join the discussion

by paes » Sat Jun 26, 2010 4:37 am
Oh..... my fault.

I read E as :

The people taking 6 breaks ...........

misses the word 'more than'

thanks.
Join the discussion