Sentence Correction

Hello,

I'm having trouble understanding why my response to the following question was considered incorrect; I don't understand how the actual answer chosen by the test makers would be the best choice for this question:

According to a study by the Human Resources Ministry, between 1950 and 1980, the number of beggars in India continued to increase but at a rate lower than that of the Indian population.

Which of the following statements directly contradicts the information above?
a) The number of beggars int he general population increased slightly in thirty year period between 1950 and 1980.
b) The proportion of beggars in the Indians below the poverty line remained constant over the thirty year period.
c) The rate of increase in the number of people below the poverty line was more than the rate of growth of the general population over the thirty year period.
d) The proportion of beggars in the general population increased from 22% in 1950 to 26% in 1980.
e) The ratio of beggars in the total population of India was half as much as the ratio of the unemployed in the general population of the country.

My answer: C
Actual answer: D

The grammar in some of the options is throwing me off at times as well; is such a question expected on the actual exam?

Please let me know what you think.

Thank you!
Krithika

This is an inference question. Note down the data points -
From 1950-80 - growth rate of Indian population > growth rate of beggars.

Whenever you come across a statistics question, try to express it in the form of numbers before moving on to the answer choices.

Let us assume this -
Population 1950 - x; Percentage of beggars - p1.
Population 1980 - y; Percentage of beggars - p2.

Growth rate in population = (y-x)/x = y/x - 1. -------(1)
Growth rate in beggar population = (p2y - p1x)/p1x = (p2/p1)* (y/x) - 1 ------(2)

Since we are told (1) > (2) we get - (p2/p1) < 1.
Which option does not say this?
Only option D. (26/22) > 1.
A - incorrect. Less than the growth of indian population does not mean the the number of beggars increased only slightly. If the population increased significantly, the number of beggars could also have grown significantly(with its growth be still less than the growth of population).
B - we are not interested in beggars/Indians below poverty line, but beggars/Indians as a whole. Notice the scope shift used.
C - nowhere is it mentioned that beggars = below poverty line in the argument. Also, nowhere in the argument is below poverty line mentioned. so you have no data about this demographic to come to any meaningful conclusion. so, read the argument carefully.
D- correct answer.
E - No data about unemployment is mentioned in the argument. Again, no where is 50% mentioned.

krithika1993 wrote:Hello,

I'm having trouble understanding why my response to the following question was considered incorrect; I don't understand how the actual answer chosen by the test makers would be the best choice for this question:

According to a study by the Human Resources Ministry, between 1950 and 1980, the number of beggars in India continued to increase but at a rate lower than that of the Indian population.

Which of the following statements directly contradicts the information above?
a) The number of beggars int he general population increased slightly in thirty year period between 1950 and 1980.
b) The proportion of beggars in the Indians below the poverty line remained constant over the thirty year period.
c) The rate of increase in the number of people below the poverty line was more than the rate of growth of the general population over the thirty year period.
d) The proportion of beggars in the general population increased from 22% in 1950 to 26% in 1980.
e) The ratio of beggars in the total population of India was half as much as the ratio of the unemployed in the general population of the country.

My answer: C
Actual answer: D

The grammar in some of the options is throwing me off at times as well; is such a question expected on the actual exam?

Please let me know what you think.

Thank you!
Krithika

Hi krithika1993,

For future reference, please post in the correct forum as you have posted a few Critical Reasoning questions in the Sentence Correction forum.

Coming to the particular question, you can summarise the stimulus as below:

Between 1950 and 1980, no. of beggars in India increased but less than the growth rate of population in India.
In short, both the numbers have grown - no. of beggars in India and the total population of India. But, for instance the population grew by 10% then the no. of beggars grew by less than 10%.

Now, check for the options:

A. The option does not talk about the comparison with the total population number and we are not looking for absolute number options. INCORRECT.
B. This option talks about the proportion of beggars in a subset of the total population - people under the poverty line whereas the two numbers compared in the stimulus are no. of beggars and total population. INCORRECT
C. People under poverty line are described as people earning below a certain figure necessary for a base level standard of living. However, this section of population will have two kinds of people - those who are able to barely earn a living and beggars. In short, people under poverty line is NOT synonymous with beggars. INCORRECT
D. Consider this example. In country Hakuna Matata, there are 100 people. Of these 100 people, 22 of them are beggars = 22%. 30 years later, the population has increased to 200, thereby a 100% increase. However, beggars have increased to 52 = 26% of the population (52 out of 200) and the increase over these 30 years is approximately 135% (30 over a base of 22). So, while the population grew at 100% the no. of beggars grew by about 135%. This negates the premise that no. of beggars grew at a rate slower than the total population. CORRECT
E. The two numbers - no. of beggars and no. of unemployed people have no relation to each other. Also, this is a number which finds no mention at all in the stimulus. INCORRECT

Thus, the answer is D.