Recent research has indicated that married people are not only happier than unmarried people, but also healthier. This study has been widely reported by the media, with most commentators concluding that being married is good for one’s health and attitude.

The conclusion of the media commentators depends on which of the following assumptions?

The longer people are married, the happier and healthier they become.

Married couples who had a large, extravagant wedding are happier than those who had a small, simple ceremony.

Married people cannot get depressed.

Single people with depression or health problems are just as likely to get married as are other single people.

Some marriages are more harmonious than others.

OA: D

Explanation for option C: At first, this statement may seem necessary—after all, if the commentators conclude that marriage causes happiness, a lack of depression in married people would certainly support that conclusion. However, the statement is too extreme. One depressed married person does not invalidate the research indicating that, on average, married people are healthier and happier than non-married people.

My question is: The option does not say "a married person cannot get depressed" (singular). Instead it says, "Married people cannot get depressed." (plural)

It seems to me that if that is negated, the argument will fail.

You are right about this.
The conclusion:being married is good for one’s health and attitude.
1st premise:Recent research has indicated that married people are not only happier than unmarried people, but also healthier.

(C) is first of all too extreme and secondly the premise is a generic statement that (Happiness)married>Happiness(unmarried). Treat this as a weighted average problem, wherein there is depression and happiness in both groups but the overall net positive effect(Happiness-Depression) is greater in married people than in their counterparts.

Ok, another way, I know it's weird though....
Let's assume happiness increases from a scale of 0 to infinity and depression from -infinity to 0

for unmarried people the net result might turn out to be -20 and for married the result might be -10( Just assuming in accordance with Happiness- Depression equation and that there are no other factors determining this result). This proves that even though both groups might be in depression (ie; below 0) but still the net positive value (happiness quotient) is greater for the married group. In short, happiness/depression for a married person or married people here is defined as a relative phenomenon because of the comparitive word (than) and because no clear indications of the exactness of happiness and depression are mentioned.

Does the logic make sense?

Thanks Gokul..

Go ahead and negate C. Assume that some married people can get depressed. That doesn't destroy the whole argument, that on average married people are happier..

_________________
Tim Sanders
Manhattan GMAT Instructor