Consumer's overall perception of the value of a purchase is based not just on assessing the product's inherent value (the...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Assumption

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

Consumer's overall perception of the value of a purchase is based not just on assessing the product's inherent value (the acquisition value) but also in part on assessing the value of the "deal", i.e., the transaction value. To assess the transaction value, buyers tend to compare the sales price with another price, the "reference price", that they take to represent the product's real value - another advertised price for the same product or the price of a competing product. The more the reference price exceeds the sale price, the greater the transaction value. When advertising, retailers now routinely provide two prices: a suggested reference price and their actual selling price. Thus, when the selling price is held constant, consumers tend to perceive offers with higher suggested reference prices as presenting a better deal since they suggest greater savings.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

Acquisition value does not affect consumers' assessment of transaction value.

Advertised reference prices may differ from manufacturers' suggested retail prices.

Consumers almost never pay the full advertised reference price for a product.

Consumers perceive most suggested reference prices in retailers' advertising to be sufficiently credible as a guide to transaction value.

Transaction value is more important than acquisition value in predicting consumer purchasing behavior.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
Consumer's overall perception of the value of a purchase is based not just on assessing the product's inherent value (the acquisition value) but also in part on assessing the value of the "deal", i.e., the transaction value.	What it says: Buyers judge value using two things - the product itself and how good the deal is What it does: Sets up the foundation by showing there are two components to how we see value What it is: Author's premise about consumer psychology
To assess the transaction value, buyers tend to compare the sales price with another price, the "reference price", that they take to represent the product's real value - another advertised price for the same product or the price of a competing product.	What it says: People judge deals by comparing the sale price to a "reference price" (could be another ad price or competitor price) What it does: Explains how the "transaction value" mentioned before actually works What it is: Author's explanation of consumer behavior Visualization: Sale Price: $80, Reference Price: $100 → Transaction value based on this $20 difference
The more the reference price exceeds the sale price, the greater the transaction value.	What it says: Bigger gap between reference price and sale price = better deal perception What it does: Establishes the direct relationship between price difference and perceived value What it is: Author's principle about the pricing relationship Visualization: Scenario A: Reference $100, Sale $90 = $10 savings; Scenario B: Reference $120, Sale $90 = $30 savings → Scenario B feels like better deal
When advertising, retailers now routinely provide two prices: a suggested reference price and their actual selling price.	What it says: Stores commonly show both a reference price and their actual price in ads What it does: Introduces current retail practice that connects to the pricing psychology discussed What it is: Author's observation about modern retail advertising
Thus, when the selling price is held constant, consumers tend to perceive offers with higher suggested reference prices as presenting a better deal since they suggest greater savings.	What it says: If sale price stays the same, higher reference prices make deals look better because savings appear bigger What it does: Draws the logical conclusion from all the previous points about how retailers can manipulate perception What it is: Author's main conclusion Visualization: Product A: Reference $150, Sale $100 = $50 savings; Product B: Reference $120, Sale $100 = $20 savings → Product A seems like better deal even though both cost $100

Argument Flow:

The argument starts by establishing that consumers judge value using two factors, then explains how one factor (transaction value) works through price comparisons. It shows the mathematical relationship between price gaps and perceived value, notes that retailers use this knowledge in their advertising, and concludes that retailers can manipulate perception by adjusting reference prices while keeping sale prices constant.

Main Conclusion:

When retailers keep the selling price the same but use higher suggested reference prices, consumers will think they're getting a better deal because the savings appear greater.

Logical Structure:

The argument builds a logical chain: consumer psychology (how we judge value) → specific mechanism (price comparison) → mathematical relationship (bigger gap = better perception) → real-world application (retailer practice) → final outcome (manipulation of consumer perception). Each step depends on the previous one to reach the conclusion about how reference prices influence buying decisions.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Assumption - We need to find what must be true for the argument's conclusion to hold. The conclusion is that when selling price stays the same, consumers perceive offers with higher suggested reference prices as better deals.

Precision of Claims

The argument makes specific claims about consumer behavior - that they compare sale prices to reference prices, that bigger gaps create better perceived value, and that retailers can manipulate this by showing higher reference prices while keeping sale prices constant.

Strategy

To find assumptions, we need to think about what could break this argument while respecting the facts given. The argument concludes that higher reference prices make deals seem better when sale prices are constant. What needs to be true for this to work? We should look for gaps between the premises and conclusion.

Answer Choices Explained

Acquisition value does not affect consumers' assessment of transaction value.

This goes too far by claiming acquisition value has NO effect on transaction value assessment. The argument only focuses on how transaction value works through price comparisons - it doesn't need to assume that acquisition value is completely irrelevant to transaction value. The argument can succeed even if acquisition value has some influence on transaction value assessment.

Advertised reference prices may differ from manufacturers' suggested retail prices.

This describes a possible relationship between different types of prices, but the argument doesn't depend on this. The argument works regardless of whether advertised reference prices match or differ from manufacturers' suggested prices. The key is how consumers respond to whatever reference prices retailers choose to show.

Consumers almost never pay the full advertised reference price for a product.

While this might often be true in practice, the argument doesn't require this assumption. The argument only needs consumers to use reference prices for comparison purposes - it doesn't matter how often people actually pay those reference prices. The psychological comparison effect works whether people sometimes, rarely, or never pay the reference price.

Consumers perceive most suggested reference prices in retailers' advertising to be sufficiently credible as a guide to transaction value.

This is exactly what the argument needs to be true. If consumers viewed reference prices as completely fake or unreliable, then higher reference prices wouldn't make deals seem better - people would ignore them entirely. For the argument's conclusion to work (that higher reference prices create better deal perception), consumers must trust these reference prices enough to use them in their mental calculations. This assumption is essential for the argument's mechanism to function.

Transaction value is more important than acquisition value in predicting consumer purchasing behavior.

This makes a claim about relative importance that goes beyond what the argument needs. The argument only explains how transaction value works and how retailers can influence it - it doesn't need transaction value to be MORE important than acquisition value for this mechanism to exist and be useful to retailers.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...