The difference in average annual income in favor of employees who have college degrees, compared with those who do not...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
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?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| 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. |
|
Argument Flow:
The passage starts with a factual observation about income gaps doubling, then presents one theory that tries to explain this phenomenon. It's setting up a situation where we have a fact that needs explaining, and then gives us one possible explanation to consider.
Main Conclusion:
There isn't really a main conclusion here - this passage is presenting a puzzle (doubled income gap) and one proposed explanation (employer competition for college grads). The question stem tells us we need to find what undermines this explanation.
Logical Structure:
This follows a 'phenomenon + proposed explanation' structure. We have an observed fact (income gap doubled) and a theory trying to explain it (employer competition drove up wages). The logical link assumes that if employers competed more for college grads, this competition would naturally drive their wages higher, creating the observed income gap.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Weaken - We need to find information that would make us doubt the analysts' explanation that increased employer competition for college grads drove up their wages
Precision of Claims
The key claim is about causation - that employer competition specifically caused college grad wages to rise. We need to be precise about what drove the income gap to double between 1980-1990
Strategy
To weaken this explanation, we need scenarios that either:
- Show the income gap doubled for reasons other than college grad wages rising due to competition
- Show that employer competition for college grads actually decreased rather than increased
- Show that something else caused the gap to double (like non-college grad wages falling)
This directly undermines the analysts' explanation by showing that college graduates were actually having more difficulty finding appropriate jobs during the 1980s. If employers were truly competing more for college graduates (driving up wages), we wouldn't expect to see a growing percentage of college grads unable to find degree-requiring jobs and having to take unskilled work instead. This suggests the opposite of what the analysts claim - the job market for college graduates was getting worse, not more competitive. This weakens the explanation that employer competition drove up college grad wages.
The average age of employees increasing slightly doesn't directly address whether employers were competing more for college graduates or not. Age changes could be due to demographic shifts, longer working careers, or other factors completely unrelated to the competition for college-educated workers. This doesn't weaken the analysts' explanation about employer competition driving wage gaps.
Stable unemployment rates throughout the 1980s don't tell us anything specific about competition for college graduates versus non-graduates. Overall unemployment remaining constant is compatible with increased competition for college grads - employers could still be competing more intensely for the specific subset of college-educated workers while overall job market conditions remain stable.
This actually supports rather than undermines the analysts' explanation. If the income gap between advanced degree holders and bachelor's degree holders also increased, this suggests that higher education levels were becoming more valuable during this period - which is consistent with employers competing more for educated workers at all levels.
The existence of some high-earning non-college workers doesn't undermine the overall trend or explanation. We're dealing with average income differences across large groups, and individual exceptions don't change the broader pattern. Some non-college workers earning top wages doesn't contradict the idea that employers were generally competing more for college graduates as a group.