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
Start free 5-day trial
Read 559 reviewsTarget Test Prep

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

weakened by all of the following EXCEPT??

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:57 pmFollowed by: 3 members
Thanked: 6 times
by himu » Sat Sep 29, 2012 10:26 pm
More citizens of Alphaville tune in to nightly news programs than do citizens of Bentonville. Thus, citizens of Alphaville know more about global issues than do

citizens of Bentonville.
The conclusion to the left is weakened by all of the following EXCEPT:
A The population of Alphaville is 2,000,000; the population of Bentonville is 1,000,000.

B
Citizens of Bentonville are more likely to listen to news radio programs than are citizens of Alphaville.

C
Citizens of Alphaville generally put the television on as background noise during dinner and chores, while citizens of Bentonville never watch television unless they

are paying full attention to it.

D
The nightly news programs in Alphaville are restricted to tabloid coverage of celebrities.

E
Citizens in Bentonville can view nightly news programs only by purchasing cable television access.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:27 pm
Location: Tampa, Fl

by EricJA » Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:57 pm
So, basically the conclusion is that citizens of A are better informed about global events than citizens of B because citizens of A watch more nightly news programs.

You can exclude anything that weakens the connection between the amount of news watched and how informed the person is.

Let's look at B. It does weaken the argument because it allows that citizens of B may get news from another source and so makes it at least possible that they know as much or more than citizens of A about global events. So, it's not the answer.

Let's look at C. Citizens of A are not paying attention and citizens of B watch fewer hours of news but really pay attention when they watch. The amount of attention paid could make the citizens of B better informed, despite their having watched fewer hours of televison news. It does weaken the argument, so it's not the answer.

Looking at D, you can see that by changing the content of nighly news to something that has nothing to do with global events, citizens of A would not be becoming better informed by tuning in, so it does weaken the argument that watching the news makes them better informed about global events.

A is the answer because the size of the towns has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not watching the news in A makes citizens of A more informed than citizens of B.

Make sense? Good luck, Himu!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 6:33 am
Thanked: 1 times

by anirudh.n » Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:31 am
IMO E.

E is irrelevant but all others considerably weaken the conclusion.

What is the OA?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 184
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:04 pmFollowed by: 2 members
Thanked: 10 times

by Mission2012 » Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:50 am
The argument is based on assumption that if higher percentage of people of a place watch informative programmes then the people of that place are more informed.

Number of people watching news show in A > Number of people watching news show in B => higher percentage of people in A watch news channel and hence are more informed

This argument can be undermined if population of A much higher than B. Which is what option A tells us.

Only option E doesn't impact the argument
If you find my post useful -> please click on "Thanks"
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 279
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:56 pmFollowed by: 10 members
Thanked: 60 times

by anuprajan5 » Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:09 am
Hi,

I am sceptical about your reasoning. There is no discussion about proportion - it just states that citizens of A-ville are more well informed than B-ville.

Assume it is proportion, you could have 2 cases:

Case 1:
A-ville - Population - 2000 Citizens watching - 501
B-ville - Population - 1000 Citizens watching - 500

Conlusion weakened

Case 2:
A-ville - Population - 2000 Citizens watching - 1850
B-ville - Population - 1000 Citizens watching - 900

Conclusion is not weakened.

SO I rule out A


My reasoning for E is that since B-ville citizens have to pay to get access, that might deter them from watching the shows, thereby strengthening the idea that A-ville citizens know more about global issues.

This is the 2nd time i have seen this question - and it has raised flags then as well.

My answer is E
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 11:46 am

by kiran786 » Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:26 am
Can anyone tell me what is the correct answer for this?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 6:27 pm
Location: Tampa, Fl

by EricJA » Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:15 pm
Yes. I don't think I considered A the right way. It should be ruled out. ;-) Have to agree that E is best.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1