The question asks us to choose the option that would not weaken the author's claims.

Consider option 1. The author claims that 'the presence of so much stuff in America might be more valuable if it were more evenly distributed, but stuff’s creators tend to focus their energy on those who already have plenty'. That is, product choice for higher income groups does not really benefit the poor. But if product options increased market competition, bringing down the prices of commodities, which, in turn, increased purchasing power of the poor, then the author's claim is weakened.

Option 2 relates to sales growth of companies with fewer product options. The author claims that people when presented with a few options make better, easier decisions than when presented with many. So, if the annual sales growth of companies with fewer product options were higher than that of companies which curated their products for target consumers, then the author's claim is actually strengthened.

Consider option 3. The author claims that choice fatigue is the reason why people gravitate toward lifestyle influencers on Instagram. If the annual sale of companies that hired lifestyle influencers on Instagram for marketing their products were 40% less than those that did not, then the author's claim is weakened.

Consider option 4. The author states that 'research has consistently held that people who are presented with a few options make better, easier decisions than those presented with many'. But if the empowerment felt by purchasers in buying a commodity were directly proportional to the number of options they could choose from, it would weaken author's claim.