Doubts on the following..Please explain

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:06 am
Thanked: 1 times

Doubts on the following..Please explain

by GG04 » Wed Oct 22, 2008 6:14 am
1. . After the national speed limit of 55 miles per hour was imposed in 1974, the number of deaths per mile driven on a highway fell abruptly as a result. Since then, however, the average speed of vehicles on highways has risen, but the number of deaths per mile driven on a highway has continued to fall.
Which of the following conclusions can be properly drawn from the statements above?
(A) The speed limit alone is probably not responsible for the continued reduction in highway deaths in the years after 1974.
(B) People have been driving less since 1974.
(C) Driver-education courses have been more effective since 1974 in teaching drivers to drive safely.
(D) In recent years highway patrols have been less effective in catching drivers who speed.
(E) The change in the speed limit cannot be responsible for the abrupt decline in highway deaths in 1974.

Why is E wrong?
OA: A

2.A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County found that, of the severely injured drivers and front-seat passengers, 80 percent were not wearing seat belts at the time of their accidents. This indicates that, by wearing seat belts, drivers and front-seat passengers can greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured if they are in an auto accident.
The conclusion above is not properly drawn unless which of the following is true?
(A) Of all the drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey, more than 20 percent were wearing seat belts at the time of their accidents.
(B)Considerably more than 20 percent of drivers and front-seat passengers in Dole County always wear seat belts when traveling by car.
(C) More drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey than rear-seat passengers were very severely injured.
(D) More than half of the drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey were not wearing seat belts at the time of their accidents.
(E) Most of the auto accidents reported to police in Dole County do not involve any serious injury.

OA: A

3. . Six months or so after getting a video recorder, many early buyers apparently lost interest in obtaining videos to watch on it. The trade of businesses selling and renting videos is still buoyant, because the number of homes with video recorders is still growing. But clearly, once the market for video recorders is saturated, businesses distributing videos face hard times.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion above?
(A) The market for video recorders would not be considered saturated until there was one in 80 percent of homes.
(B) Among the items handled by video distributors are many films specifically produced as video features.
(C) Few of the early buyers of video recorders raised any complaints about performance aspects of the new product.
(D) The early buyers of a novel product are always people who are quick to acquire novelties, but also often as quick to tire of them.
(E) In a shrinking market, competition always intensifies and marginal businesses fail.
OA: D

4.Advertiser: The revenue that newspapers and magazines earn by publishing advertisements allows publishers to keep the prices per copy of their publications much lower than would otherwise be possible. Therefore, consumers benefit economically from advertising.
Consumer: But who pays for the advertising that pays for low-priced newspapers and magazines? We consumers do, because advertisers pass along advertising costs to us through the higher prices they charge for their products.
Which of the following best describes how the consumer counters the advertiser’s argument?
(A) By alleging something that, if true, would weaken the plausibility of the advertiser’s conclusion
(B) By questioning the truth of the purportedly factual statement on which the advertiser’s conclusion is based
(C) By offering an interpretation of the advertiser’s opening statement that, if accurate, shows that there is an implicit contradiction in it
(D) By pointing out that the advertiser’s point of view is biased
(E) By arguing that the advertiser too narrowly restricts the discussion to the effects of advertising that are economic
OA: A

5. Mr. Lawson: We should adopt a national family policy that includes legislation requiring employers to provide paid parental leave and establishing government-sponsored day care. Such laws would decrease the stress levels of employees who have responsibility for small children. Thus, such laws would lead to happier, better-adjusted families.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
(A) An employee’s high stress level can be a cause of unhappiness and poor adjustment for his or her family.
(B) People who have responsibility for small children and who work outside the home have higher stress levels than those who do not.
(C) The goal of a national family policy is to lower the stress levels of parents.
(D) Any national family policy that is adopted would include legislation requiring employers to provide paid parental leave and establishing government-sponsored day care.
(E) Most children who have been cared for in daycare centers are happy and well adjusted.
OA: A

6. Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.
The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.
(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.
(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.
(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.
(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors.
OA: A

7[same passage as in 6]. Which of the following inferences about the conse-quences of instituting the new tests is best supported by the passage above?
(A) The incidence of new cases of NANB hepatitis is likely to go up by 10 percent.
(B) Donations made by patients specifically for their own use are likely to become less frequent.
(C) The demand for blood from blood banks is likely to fluctuate more strongly.
(D) The blood supplies available from blood banks are likely to go down.
(E) The number of prospective first-time donors is likely to go up by 5 percent.
OA: D
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Legendary Member
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 6:44 pm
Location: UK
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:680

by rohangupta83 » Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:17 am
1 (A)
E is wrong as choice E categorically says that the change in speed cannot be responsible for the decline in deaths per mile.

Whereas, the reduction in speed might have been one of the factors which helped bring the death / mile rate down in 1974.

Choice is limits the scope whereas in GMAT you are better off picking a choice with a broader scope.
Last edited by rohangupta83 on Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

Legendary Member
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 6:44 pm
Location: UK
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:680

by rohangupta83 » Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:01 am
6 A

a- The argument says that after the new tests are performed, 5% of the donors won't be able to donate any more because they will test positive for NANB hepatitis.

our conclusion says '' Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood''.

So, we know that 10% of the donors who are tested for NANB hepatitis will test negative and donate blood, unless they test positive for something else and are then prohibited to donate blood. (which is what choice A assumes)


b- argument does not talk about developing the disease - out of scope
c- funny
d- statement is likely true but out of scope of our argument.
e- argument is not talking about the frequency of blood donation - incorrect


7 D

a- don't know as we'll only be able to identify 5% of donors. We don't know the existing number.

b- irrelevant - out of scope

c- no information on the demand of blood in the argument - out of scope

d- because there will be 5% less donors now, the blood supplies are likely to go down. Unless of course there are new eligible donors but we have no information about those. so choice (D) it is.

e- don't know whether there will be new donors or not - out of scope

Legendary Member
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 6:44 pm
Location: UK
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:680

by rohangupta83 » Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:29 am
5 (A)

New laws reduce stress in employees (From the Interim conclusion)

reduced stress leads to happier and better adjusted families (From the Final Conclusion)

therefore, new laws reduce stress in employees which leads to happier and better adjusted families.

OR

an employees high stress levels could be the cause of unhappiness and poor adjustment for his/her family.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 10:47 am
Location: new york city
Thanked: 1 times

4

by mberkowitz » Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:17 pm
(A) By alleging something that, if true, would weaken the plausibility of the advertiser’s conclusion

(B) By questioning the truth of the purportedly factual statement on which the advertiser’s conclusion is based


(C) By offering an interpretation of the advertiser’s opening statement that, if accurate, shows that there is an implicit contradiction in it

im between A and C. I feel like C is the specific answer, while A is the general answer. One could say that the general answer usually trumps the specific answer in CR, but in this case I am not convinced by A. In C, the arguement certainly points out an implicit contradiction.[/b]

Legendary Member
Posts: 891
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:21 am
Thanked: 27 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:660(

by 4meonly » Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:30 am
4. Advertiser: The revenue that newspapers and magazines earn by publishing advertisements allows publishers to keep the prices per copy of their publications much lower than would otherwise be possible. Therefore, consumers benefit economically from advertising.
Consumer: But who pays for the advertising that pays for low-priced newspapers and magazines? We consumers do, because advertisers pass along advertising costs to us through the higher prices they charge for their products.

Which of the following best describes how the consumer counters the advertiser’s argument?



Advertiser: (The revenue from advertisements) ----> (low prices per copy) ----> (consumers benefit from advertising)
Consumer: (advertisers pay for adversing) --> (advertisers increase prices) ---> (consumers pay for advertising)
If advertisers increase prices then consumers do not benefit economically from advertising.
By alleging something that, if true, would weaken the plausibility of the advertiser’s conclusion

So, A

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 5:32 pm
Location: NY and Boston
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:16 members

by Karen » Fri Nov 07, 2008 7:18 pm
6 is kind of interesting, because it seems like such a typical GMAT set-up. They say that the test will miss 2/3 of the people who have NANB hepatitis, and then conclude that those people will actually be donating blood. They're inviting you to make the mistake of thinking that the NANB test is the *only* thing that could disqualify those people. But what if they're disqualified for some other reason? The fact that a certain number of people score negative on this one test doesn't automatically guarantee that they will all become actual blood donors. So the argument follows only if A is assumed.

The thing that's typical about this is that the GMAT often tests to see whether you'll get a kind of tunnel vision, focusing only on the details they're talking about, or whether you'll think, "Hey, what about --" and question whether the conclusion really does follow from what was said.
Karen van Hoek, PhD
Verbal Specialist

Test Prep New York
maximize your score, minimize your stress
www.testprepny.com
[email protected]

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 4:18 am
Thanked: 5 times
GMAT Score:610

by Jatinder » Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:10 am
Karen wrote:6 is kind of interesting, because it seems like such a typical GMAT set-up. They say that the test will miss 2/3 of the people who have NANB hepatitis, and then conclude that those people will actually be donating blood. They're inviting you to make the mistake of thinking that the NANB test is the *only* thing that could disqualify those people. But what if they're disqualified for some other reason? The fact that a certain number of people score negative on this one test doesn't automatically guarantee that they will all become actual blood donors. So the argument follows only if A is assumed.

The thing that's typical about this is that the GMAT often tests to see whether you'll get a kind of tunnel vision, focusing only on the details they're talking about, or whether you'll think, "Hey, what about --" and question whether the conclusion really does follow from what was said.
Thanks Karen for the beautii explanation.
I was just wondering that how did they conclude about the figure "10%"
i thought the asumption would will the gap between 2/3 of the people carrying NANB and 10 percent of actual donors who will still supply NANB-Hapititis.

I got the rational behind A, but am confused about the figure-10%
Can you please explain?

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 5:32 pm
Location: NY and Boston
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:16 members

by Karen » Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:03 pm
They're saying that the test will disqualify 5% of potential donors, and then they say that the test will miss 2/3 of the people who carry the disease. So 5% of donors represents 1/3 of the total percentage of potential donors who carry the disease. Therefore, a total of 15% of potential blood donors (before the screening tests) must carry the disease, and only 1/3 of those are removed by the test. Therefore 10% of the actual donors will be carriers of the disease.

Unless, of course, they get screened out by some *other* test. That's where answer choice A comes in.
Karen van Hoek, PhD
Verbal Specialist

Test Prep New York
maximize your score, minimize your stress
www.testprepny.com
[email protected]

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 4:18 am
Thanked: 5 times
GMAT Score:610

by Jatinder » Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:31 pm
Karen wrote:They're saying that the test will disqualify 5% of potential donors, and then they say that the test will miss 2/3 of the people who carry the disease. So 5% of donors represents 1/3 of the total percentage of potential donors who carry the disease. Therefore, a total of 15% of potential blood donors (before the screening tests) must carry the disease, and only 1/3 of those are removed by the test. Therefore 10% of the actual donors will be carriers of the disease.

Unless, of course, they get screened out by some *other* test. That's where answer choice A comes in.
Thanks a lot Karen. You really Rock ya :)

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:58 am

by peter.p.81 » Wed May 11, 2016 3:09 am
Option A looks good than other answers.