BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions
Start free 5-day trial
Read 559 reviewsTarget Test Prep

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Complicated CR Question

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:21 am
by thegmatbeater » Sun May 25, 2008 7:43 am
1. Based on comprehensive longitudinal studies of accident prevention, several states have passed laws requiring children under the age of 18 to wear helmets when they roller blade. Yet a surprising result has been observed. Even though a large number of children wear helmets while roller blading, more head injuries than expected have been reported. This result persists, even though the studies have clearly shown that wearing a helmet reduces the incidence of head injuries.

Which of the following statements, if true, best explains the unexpected finding?

(A) A large number of parents are not complying with the law regarding helmets for their children
(B) More children are roller blading now than when the helmet law was introduced
(C) More accidents are reported now, in compliance with state insurance laws
(D) Many children do not properly secure the helmet's chin strap, and the helmet does not work properly
(E) Helmets were not designed to prevent all head injuries, so it is not surprising that they still occur
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 2:17 pm

by hema123 » Sun May 25, 2008 8:46 am
In My Opinion , Answer is D.

It asks us to find out the inconsistency. Even when Helmets are proposed to be safe , many childern are getting injured. The only factor responsible for this would be that childern are not wearing it properly. Hence there is no fault in the proposal but the implementation is not correct.

What's the OA?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 2:17 pm

by hema123 » Sun May 25, 2008 9:17 am
In My Opinion , Answer is D.

It asks us to find out the inconsistency. Even when Helmets are proposed to be safe , many childern are getting injured. The only factor responsible for this would be that childern are not wearing it properly. Hence there is no fault in the proposal but the implementation is not correct.

What's the OA?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 114
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:21 am

by thegmatbeater » Sun May 25, 2008 11:19 pm
The answer is D. I thought that the reported accidents may increase so the absolute number of injuries increase because such type of answers are common in CR questions (analyzing the proportion and absolute value )
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 438
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 9:44 am
Thanked: 26 times

by chidcguy » Mon May 26, 2008 3:50 pm
I fell for C as well.

I am not sure where the Q asks us to find the inconsistency. It only asks us to explain the unexpected finding. Also the stimulus says that "even though the studies have clearly shown that wearing a helmet reduces the incidence of head injuries."

By selecting D, aren't we going down a very narrow choice ( I understand it might sound very close, by saying that plan is correct, but implementation is wrong). We can't tell for sure whether children are wearing them properly or not. There is a good chance that the children are wearing them properly, but the agencies are reporting them now. What goes against C is the intro of insurance laws, which is not mentioned at all in the stimulus. If it was being reported by the normal state agencies or if the stimulus has mentioned the insurance companies in the stimuli. it would have been more difficult.

What is the source of this Q?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 7:32 am
Thanked: 2 times

Why B is not correct?

by nil4700 » Mon May 26, 2008 6:34 pm
I think choice B is also in favor of the unexpected finding. But what is the reason that we have to eliminate this option? Increase in number of children participating may increase the number of accidents. Right?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:02 am
Thanked: 12 times

by jasonc » Mon May 26, 2008 11:04 pm
'more head injuries than expected have been reported.'

increase in number of kids skating would increase the expected # of incidents
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 10:11 pm

by rattanas » Tue May 27, 2008 2:35 am
i guess B cant be the option as even more children have started rollerblading..the children who would go against the law of not wearin helmet wont be significant enough for the unexpected results...

D gives the best explanation.....
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:26 am

by khanshainur » Tue May 10, 2016 5:34 am
i think it's D
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1