Question


The difference in average annual income in favor of employees who have college degrees, compared with those who do not have such degrees, doubled between 1980 and 1990. Some analysts have hypothesized that increased competition between employers for employees with college degrees drove up income for such employees.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the explanation described above?

(This question is from the Official Guide. Therefore, because of copyrights, the complete question cannot be copied here. The question can be accessed at GMAT Club)

Difficulty: Medium

Accuracy: 71%

Based on: 8653 sessions

Solution


The Story

The difference in average annual income in favor of employees who have college degrees, compared with those who do not have such degrees, doubled between 1980 and 1990.

The statement compares incomes of degree-holders and non-degree holders. We learn that the difference in the average income of the two groups has doubled. 

What difference is being talked about?

The difference between:

  1. Average salary of degree-holders
  2. Average salary of non-degree-holders

This difference doubled over 10 years. 

So maybe:

  • degree-holders have started earning more while the other group’s income remained the same,
  • non-degree-holders have started earning less while the other group’s income remained the same, or 
  • One group’s income has gone up a bit and the other’s has gone down a bit

Some analysts have hypothesized that increased competition between employers for employees with college degrees drove up income for such employees.
Hypothesis by some analysts: increased competition for degree-holders drove up their income.
↑competition → ↑income
(The analysts assume that the difference doubled because of a rise in income of degree-holders, and they have come up with a reason for the income increase – increased competition.)

Question Stem


Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the explanation described above?

The difference between the average salaries has doubled. 

What’s the explanation?

↑Competition for degree-holders → ↑Income of degree-holders → ↑Difference in annual income of degree-holders and non-degree-holders

What would undermine this explanation?

  1. The correct answer could attack either of the links, by indicating that:
    • the income of degree-holders did not go up because of increased competition, or that
    • the income of degree-holders did not go up

Answer choice analysis


Answer Choice: A

Correct

Selected by: 71%

If in the 80’s a growing percentage of graduates were unable to find jobs requiring a college degree and could only find unskilled jobs, then, it appears, the competition for graduates would not have increased. Since even non-graduates could take unskilled jobs, the analysts’ hypothesis that salaries for graduates would have gone up because of increased competition for them doesn’t make sense.

Are you wondering what if these unskilled jobs paid more to degree holders?
That is possible. But these are unskilled jobs, so I’m thinking that probably the pay would be the same.
Nevertheless, even if this possibility exists, the answer choice does undermine the explanation. The correct answer need not destroy the explanation.

Some people eliminate answer choice A after deciding that it does not present an alternative explanation. However, such reasoning is incomplete. While the answer choice doesn’t provide an alternative reason, it does reduce our belief in the current explanation. And that’s all we are looking for.


Answer Choice: B

Incorrect

Selected by: 1%

The overall average age of employees increased – across graduate and non-graduate employees. This option does not differentiate between graduates and non-graduates. No impact.


Answer Choice: C

Incorrect

Selected by: 3%

Statement: The level of employment pretty much remained constant. 

This answer choice, just like option B, does not differentiate between graduates and non-graduates. This option does not lead me to believe more or less in the increased competition hypothesis. No impact.

.


Answer Choice: D

Incorrect

Selected by: 7%

Statement: The difference in average income between advanced degrees-holders and bachelor’s degrees-holders also increased.

In whose favor did the difference increase?

Well, even if we take this option to indicate that either bachelor’s degree-holders or advanced degree-holders had started earning more, what we are after are the reasons behind the increase.
This answer choice actually strengthens the given reasoning by indicating that one segment within the degree-holders had started earning more than the other. So perhaps the difference between graduates and non-graduates did not increase because of the non-graduates’ income going down.


Answer Choice: E

Incorrect

Selected by: 17%

Statement: At least one non-graduate earned an income close to the top incomes earned by graduates.

This answer choice is the most commonly selected wrong answer.

In order to understand why this answer choice is incorrect, first let’s replace the word ‘some’ with ‘many’.

(E’) During the 1980s there were MANY employees with no college degree who earned incomes comparable to the top incomes earned by employees with a college degree.

Would this modified statement undermine the explanation?

Remember, the explanation we need to undermine is that the increased competition for graduates drove up their income and that led to the increased difference between the average salaries.

Our job is not to question whether the difference between the average salaries did actually double or not.

The difference did double. 

Our job is to question the given reason behind it.

After reading this statement, I am simply more confused about how the difference between graduates’ and non-graduates’ average salaries doubled.
Through this answer choice I do not learn anything new about what might or might not have caused the difference to double.

The answer choice is wrong even if we replace the word ‘many’ back with ‘some’. The same reasoning still applies. We have to undermine the explanation. We do not have to undermine the fact that the difference in average annual incomes doubled. 

Additional Notes


Between 1980 and 1990 = During the 1980s

If you have any doubts regarding any part of this solution, please feel free to ask in the comments section.

Anish Passi

GMAT Coach

With over a decade of GMAT training experience, top 1 percentile scores on the CAT and GMAT, and a passion for teaching, I’d like to believe I am quite qualified to be a GMAT coach. GMAT is learnable, and I help students master the GMAT through a process-oriented approach based on logic and common sense. I offer private tutoring and live-online classroom courses. My sessions are often sprinkled with real-world examples, references to movies, and jokes that only I find funny. You’ve been warned 🙂

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

We are sorry that this post was not very useful for you!

Let us improve this post!

Tell us how we can improve this post?

>