• Free Practice Test & Review
How would you score if you took the GMAT

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• 5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• Magoosh
Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• 5 Day FREE Trial
Study Smarter, Not Harder

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• Award-winning private GMAT tutoring
Register now and save up to $200 Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Get 300+ Practice Questions 25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Trial & Practice Exam BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • 1 Hour Free BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Veritas GMAT Class Experience Lesson 1 Live Free Available with Beat the GMAT members only code ## Critical reasoning OG 13 tagged by: ceilidh.erickson This topic has 1 expert reply and 3 member replies anksm22 Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts Joined 02 Jul 2014 Posted: 124 messages Followed by: 1 members #### Critical reasoning OG 13 Wed Jul 16, 2014 8:36 am Elapsed Time: 00:00 • Lap #[LAPCOUNT] ([LAPTIME]) In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Verland used wooden sleds with runners and steering bars. Ten years ago, smooth plastic sleds became popular; they go faster than wooden sleds but are harder to steer and slow. The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was 10 years ago. Which of the following, if true in Verland, most seriously undermines the force of the evidence cited? (A) A few children still use traditional wooden sleds. (B) Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding. (C) Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can. (D) Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled. (E) Because the traditional wooden sleds can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured. Please explain this Need free GMAT or MBA advice from an expert? Register for Beat The GMAT now and post your question in these forums! ### Top Member VivianKerr GMAT Instructor Joined 17 Dec 2010 Posted: 1035 messages Followed by: 364 members Thanked: 473 times Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:26 pm This is a Weaken question. Before you can read the answer choices, write down your own pre-phrased answer. Since the argument is flawed, you might be able to think of 2-3 ways it can be weakened. Try to hone in on the BIGGEST flaw you can spot. What doesn’t make logical sense? Our notes: -Wooden in past -New Plastic sleds faster -Wooden easier to steer/slow -Sled injuries HIGHER last winter Conclusion: Plastic sleds more dangerous Assumption: More injuries DUE to the switch from wood to plastic Since this is a cause/effect claim, the easiest way to undermine this would be to show that the rise in child injuries last year is NOT due to steering/slowing. Is there another cause? (C) provides us with the cause. The plastic sleds themselves aren't to blame. They are being used in MORE conditions, so if there's more sledding then there's likely more accidents. So it's indirect. _________________ Vivian Kerr GMAT Rockstar, Tutor http://www.GMATrockstar.com http://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at$150/hr. Contact: GMATrockstar@gmail.com

Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"!

anksm22 Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
02 Jul 2014
Posted:
124 messages
Followed by:
1 members
Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:34 am

### Top Member

VivianKerr GMAT Instructor
Joined
17 Dec 2010
Posted:
1035 messages
Followed by:
364 members
Thanked:
473 times
Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:59 pm
You're welcome! Notice the key to this Weaken question is the key to MOST GMAT CR: identify the question stem and the expectations that go along with it, take notes on your yellow scratch pad, then make a Prediction for what you think the correct answer should be!

Most people miss CR when they cut corners on strategy. I know I do!

_________________
Vivian Kerr
GMAT Rockstar, Tutor
http://www.GMATrockstar.com
http://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles

Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at \$150/hr. Contact: GMATrockstar@gmail.com

Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"!

### GMAT/MBA Expert

ceilidh.erickson GMAT Instructor
Joined
04 Dec 2012
Posted:
1633 messages
Followed by:
224 members
Thanked:
1419 times
Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:52 am
You should always question an argument that turns a quantitative metric such as "greater number of injuries" into a qualitative metric such as "less safe."

We're given that a greater NUMBER of children have been injured while sledding than were 10 years ago. Does that have to mean that their sleds are less safe? We should ask:
- Are there more children sledding now than there were 10 years ago?
- Are children sledding more often?
- Is the severity of accidents the same? Safety isn't just defined by number of accidents, but how severe they are.
- Is the difference in sleds the cause of the change, or is there some other behavioral difference in children over 10 years?

If we want to WEAKEN the argument, we need a reason to suggest that number of accidents does not correlate to safety.

(A) A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.
This would strengthen the argument - it's more likely that the injuries were due to the plastic sleds.

(B) Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.
Again, this would strengthen - differences in injuries is more likely to be due to the sleds, not protective gear.

(C) Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
Correct! This indicates that children are likely to sled more often. More sledding = more time spent / opportunity for injuries, without implying that the sled is to blame.

(D) Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.
This would be true of wooden and plastic sleds, so it wouldn't help us compare.

(E) Because the traditional wooden sleds can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.
Since the metric we're given is "number of children injured," this wouldn't make a difference. If the sled injures one person or multiple people at a time, it could still be judged unsafe.

_________________

Ceilidh Erickson
Manhattan Prep GMAT & GRE instructor
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education

Manhattan Prep instructors all have 99th+ percentile scores and expert teaching experience.
Sign up for a FREE TRIAL, and learn why we have the highest ratings in the GMAT industry!

Thanked by: gmatdestroyer1
Free Manhattan Prep online events - The first class of every online Manhattan Prep course is free. Classes start every week.

### Best Conversation Starters

1 Vincen 152 topics
2 lheiannie07 61 topics
3 Roland2rule 49 topics
4 ardz24 40 topics
5 LUANDATO 32 topics
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members...

### Most Active Experts

1 Brent@GMATPrepNow

GMAT Prep Now Teacher

141 posts
2 EconomistGMATTutor

The Economist GMAT Tutor

107 posts
3 GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

106 posts
4 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

EMPOWERgmat

104 posts
5 Matt@VeritasPrep

Veritas Prep

76 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts