Our Premium and Ultimate plans guarantee up to 90+ points score increase or your money back.
We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.
Study whenever and wherever you want with our iOS and Android mobile apps.
Adaptive learning technology focuses on your academic weaknesses.
It is not uncommon for a child to be scared of a clown. In a recent survey, however, clowns reported that there was an abundance of work for them, especially at the birthday parties of children under the age of 3. It can be concluded that even though some children are scared of them, clowns are popular enough amongst the rest to provide them with regular work.
The above conclusion is properly drawn if which of the following is assumed?
The fact that some children may prefer magicians to clowns is irrelevant, as it does not explain how the author got to the conclusion that some children must like clowns based on the fact that clowns have plenty of work.
Another way of eliminating this answer choice is its tone; the argument's conclusion is favorable to clowns whereas this answer choice implies they are less popular, which means it cannot be the underlying assumption.
What clowns earn is irrelevant, as it does not explain why the author connects their abundant work with their popularity among children.
To connect the amount of work clowns have with their popularity among children, the author had to assume children have a say when it comes to hiring a clown. Technically, it is possible that not even one child likes clowns but that they are still hired regularly. Therefore, it must be assumed that parents allow children to choose whether or not to hire a clown.
This answer choice presents a new premise about how clowns are seen by the media. It is irrelevant whether this new data supports the conclusion; what you are looking for is the assumption, which should explain how the author drew the conclusion based on the existing premises.
The development of clowning is irrelevant, as it does not explain why the author connects their abundant work with their popularity among children.