Critical Reasoning

Dear Friends,

I was having problems in answering the following question.

Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verdlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Few if any of the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994 broadcast to people with RDS-equipped radios living in areas not previously reached by RDS stations.
B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS.
C. Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not decrease the station's listening area.
D. In 1996 Verdlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.
E. The RDS radio stations in Verdland in 1996 did not all offer the same type of programming.


Please help.

OA after some discussions.

My choice was option D

Regards
Deano.

IMO A.

What is the OA?

IMO C. If you negate this option, the argument breaks.

"the number of Verdlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly" implies:
Although the radio stations increased, the radio equipments did not increase much. This resulted in little coverage increase of program information provided using RDS technology. So the audience without RDS radios did not get the program information.

IMO D.

OA is option A

Dean Jones wrote:Dear Friends,

I was having problems in answering the following question.

Radio stations with radio data system (RDS) technology broadcast special program information that only radios with an RDS feature can receive. Between 1994 and 1996, the number of RDS radio stations in Verdland increased from 250 to 600. However, since the number of RDS-equipped radios in Verdland was about the same in 1996 as in 1994, the number of Verdlanders receiving the special program information probably did not increase significantly. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Few if any of the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994 broadcast to people with RDS-equipped radios living in areas not previously reached by RDS stations.
B. In 1996 most Verdlanders who lived within the listening area of an RDS station already had a radio equipped to receive RDS.
C. Equipping a radio station with RDS technology does not decrease the station's listening area.
D. In 1996 Verdlanders who did not own radios equipped to receive RDS could not receive any programming from the RDS radio stations that began broadcasting in Verdland after 1994.
E. The RDS radio stations in Verdland in 1996 did not all offer the same type of programming.


Please help.

OA after some discussions.

My choice was option D

Regards
Deano.

This passage exhibits a language shift.
The premise is about X: The number of RADIOS stayed the same.
The conclusion is about Y: The number of VERDLANDERS hearing the special programming did not increase.

The passage assumes that X is linked to Y: that the number of RADIOS is linked to the number of VERDLANDERS.

What information does the passage ignore?
The 350 new radio STATIONS.
If these 350 new STATIONS reached more people, then the number of VERDLANDERS hearing the special programming likely INCREASED.
Thus, for the conclusion to be valid, it must be true that these 350 new stations did NOT reach more people.
Answer choice A states this assumption: few if any...of the RDS stations...broadcast to people...not previously reached by RDS stations.

The correct answer is A.

ace.gmat wrote:IMO C. If you negate this option, the argument breaks.

C can be negated.
1.listening area decreased.
2. Radio receivers remained the same.
3. No of people receiving information does not increase. At max it wil remain same.

My worry is option D.
Suppose in 1996, n people could listen without radios equipped to receive RDS, and r people with Radios.
Now people receiving information f = n + r, which frees f of n. So barely on trend of n, we cannot judje f!

Hope this approach is meaningfull. My first post!

@pdsrocks

I believe we cannot choose 'D' cause it just restates the fact already given in the argument and is not an assumption (which by definition is not stated in the argument). So we can safely ignore 'D'. I am new to CR by the way so I might be wrong.

Thanks GmatGuru for a wonderful explanation...
Honestly i did not understand the Option A properly and that is why i Did go for the option D....

Option D is the repetation of the premise nothing more than that... If option A was not right then Option D could have been a defender assumption question model...

a 700+ level question

IMO: A with POE

Can any expert suggests how to negate option A here and see how it breaks the conclusion ?

suyashtcs wrote:Can any expert suggests how to negate option A here and see how it breaks the conclusion ?

Check my second post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/radio-stations-t282862.html