An important thing to keep in mind about the Reading Comprehension section of the GRE as we use PowerPrep online to study is that it is just that—reading comprehension. In other words, as difficult as it may seem, and it can be pretty tricky, the test makers will always give us all the information we need in the passage to answer the question. Questions that ask us to strengthen or weaken an argument, like question 7 of the first Verbal section on practice test 1, may have answer choices not found in the passage, but we should keep in mind that the information we need is still there.

This question specifically asks about an “argument.” When a GRE question asks about an argument there are a few key structural ideas that we should keep in mind: the premises, conclusion, and any assumptions. The premises are the facts or pieces of evidence an argument is based on. The conclusion is the position that the argument is meant to support, and assumptions are any details that were not part of the premises but that would have to be true in order for the conclusion to be true.

Specifically, this question asks us to “undermine” or weaken the argument. In other words, we’re looking for an answer that identifies an assumption in the argument, and that, more importantly, shows how that assumption is not true. Since our answers themselves are not found in the passage, it is nearly impossible to predict a correct answer. So, instead we’ll need to do our best to identify the premise(s) and conclusion of the argument so that we’ll be well-equipped to identify any assumptions.

The passage tells us that people continued to consume more sugar-laden products in spite of the introduction of artificial sweeteners. Then we learn that manufacturers are introducing “fat-free” foods that apparently have the same taste and texture (yeah, right). The last sentence is generally where we’ll find our conclusion, and, indeed, here we’re told that the author does not believe fat-free foods will reduce fat consumption since sugar-free products did not reduce sugar consumption.

Conclusion: Fat-free foods will not reduce fat consumption

Premises: Sugar-free foods made with artificial sweetener did not reduce sugar consumption. Fat-free foods will have the same taste and texture.

We might note that this particular argument makes a common type of assumption, an analogy assumption. The argument assumes that sugar-free and fat-free foods are similar or analogous. Therefore, we can expect a good answer that would weaken the argument to somehow support the idea that these two things are not similar. Let’s check out our answers.

• Several kinds of fat substitute are available to manufacturers, each of which gives a noticeably different taste and texture to products that contain it.

The last sentence specifically stated that the conclusion was predicated on the fact that the manufacturers claims that fat-free foods would have the same taste and texture are TRUE. Since this answer contradicts information in the passage, we can eliminate A. (Additionally, we should note that different tastes and textures would probably make the foods less attractive, strengthening the conclusion).

• The products made with artificial sweeteners did not taste like products made with sugar.

Hmm. The conclusion was made under the circumstances that fat-free foods would taste the same as their regular counterparts, but looking over the passage, there’s no information about whether foods with artificial sweeteners actually tasted the same. This would make the introduction of fat-free foods different from the introduction sugar-free foods in that fat-free foods have been more successful at tasting the same. This could weaken the conclusion: people might be more inclined to buy fat-free foods that taste the same than sugar-free foods that didn’t taste like the original. Let’s keep B.

• The foods brought out in sugar-free versions did not generally have reduced levels of fat, but many of the fat-free versions about to be introduced are low in sugar.

Hmm. This answer does suggest some difference between fat- and sugar-free foods, but does it really weaken our conclusion. If people weren’t concerned about eating sugar-free foods before, do we necessarily know that they would be interested in sugar-free foods that are ALSO fat-free? It’s hard to say, whereas answer B very clearly suggested that sugar-free foods might be less desirable because of their taste. C only weakens the conclusion if we assume that people might be more interested in foods that are fat-free and low in sugar than foods that are either fat- or sugar-free, which we shouldn’t do. Eliminate C.

• People who regularly consume products containing artificial sweeteners are more likely than others to consume fat-free foods.

Apparently there aren’t many people consuming products with artificial sweeteners—or at least these people don’t make up a significant enough portion of the market to cause a decrease in sugar consumption overall. If these people are also the ones who would be inclined to buy fat-free foods, this would actually suggest another similarity between the two circumstances, which we do not want. We can eliminate D.

• Not all foods containing fat can be produced in fat-free versions.

Ok… so… what? This answer doesn’t really tell us any relevant information; we aren’t concerned with foods that cannot be fat-free. If anything, the fact that not all foods can be produced in fat-free versions only further supports the idea that the introduction of fat-free foods will NOT reduce fat consumption, a conclusion that we want to weaken. We can eliminate E.

Again, questions that ask us to weaken the argument require us to disprove an assumption, and answer C disproves the assumption that the introduction of sugar-free foods was wholly similar to that of fat-free foods. C is the best answer.

 

Want more expert GRE prep? Sign up for the five-day free trial of our PrepScholar GRE Online Prep Program to access your personalized study plan with 90 interactive lessons and over 1600 GRE questions.

Have questions? Leave a comment or send us an email at [email protected].