Hi ppl,
I had a slight doubt in the underlying concept of this question. Obtaining the answer per say is pretty straightforward, but I seem to find a discrepancy in my understading of the concept(under the theoretical situation where this was in fact a PS, I believe i would have been in a soup (Interested few can take my last statement as an SC)) . Would like to clarify my conceptual understanding.
The question is #75 from the Official Guide OG11 DS practice set.
In a certain office, 50% of the employees are college graduates and 60% of the employees are over 40 years old. If 30% of those over 40 have master's degrees, how many of the employees over 40 have Master's degrees?
1) Exactly 100 of the employees are college graduates.
2) Of the employees 40 years old or less, 25 percent have master's degree.
Clearly the answer would be A, as only 1) provides us with an actual number to work with rather than percentage, and with the given percentage info, this is workable.
Here's what I don't understand, isn't the information given in 2) already known to us? I mean they initially say 50% of the total are Graduates (implying whether above or below 40, 50% of them are graduates). It is also given that 30% of those over 40 have a master's degree - allowing me to believe that the left over folk who are graduates are less than 40.
Therefore,
total graduate percentage - >40 graduate percentage = <40 graduate percentage
Thus,
50%(of total ppl)-30%(of total ppl) = 20%(of total ppl) .
But now 2) tells me that this figure is 25%. What have I understood wrong? I usually notice a pattern from DS OG,where even though the amount of information given by 1), 2) or 1) and 2) together is mis-leading, it is never contradictory. Am i right in assuming this?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
thanks and keep cracking.
I had a slight doubt in the underlying concept of this question. Obtaining the answer per say is pretty straightforward, but I seem to find a discrepancy in my understading of the concept(under the theoretical situation where this was in fact a PS, I believe i would have been in a soup (Interested few can take my last statement as an SC)) . Would like to clarify my conceptual understanding.
The question is #75 from the Official Guide OG11 DS practice set.
In a certain office, 50% of the employees are college graduates and 60% of the employees are over 40 years old. If 30% of those over 40 have master's degrees, how many of the employees over 40 have Master's degrees?
1) Exactly 100 of the employees are college graduates.
2) Of the employees 40 years old or less, 25 percent have master's degree.
Clearly the answer would be A, as only 1) provides us with an actual number to work with rather than percentage, and with the given percentage info, this is workable.
Here's what I don't understand, isn't the information given in 2) already known to us? I mean they initially say 50% of the total are Graduates (implying whether above or below 40, 50% of them are graduates). It is also given that 30% of those over 40 have a master's degree - allowing me to believe that the left over folk who are graduates are less than 40.
Therefore,
total graduate percentage - >40 graduate percentage = <40 graduate percentage
Thus,
50%(of total ppl)-30%(of total ppl) = 20%(of total ppl) .
But now 2) tells me that this figure is 25%. What have I understood wrong? I usually notice a pattern from DS OG,where even though the amount of information given by 1), 2) or 1) and 2) together is mis-leading, it is never contradictory. Am i right in assuming this?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
thanks and keep cracking.
Your table is perfect for visualizing and it's immediately what I did as well.(Assuming T to be the total number of people)Just a couple of things:
