OG-12 CR Q-78

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:53 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:4 members

OG-12 CR Q-78

by ankit0411 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 11:38 am
A recent report determined that although only 3 percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, 33 percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them. Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.
The conclusion drawn above depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not.
(B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
(C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
(D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
(E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state
highways not covered in the report.

My understanding of the above question :
33% ticketed vehicles had radars equipped with them.
Conclusion : drivers who equip their vehicles with radars are more likely to exceed regularly
than drivers who are not.
The OA is B .

Can anyone help
Regards,
Ankit[/i]
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 768
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:18 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA
Thanked: 387 times
Followed by:140 members

by Mike@Magoosh » Mon Apr 23, 2012 2:00 pm
Hi, there! I'm happy to help with this. :)

This is the most common kind of CR question: find the assumption of the argument. The argument is the bridge, the glue, that connects the premise to the conclusion.

Here's a blog I wrote on finding the assumption:
https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/arguments- ... -the-gmat/

Premise:
A recent report determined that although only 3 percent of drivers on Maryland highways equipped their vehicles with radar detectors, 33 percent of all vehicles ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were equipped with them.

Conclusion:
Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who do not.

Technically, the premise mentions folks (a)getting tickets for speeding, and the conclusion immediately links that to (b)exceeding the speed limit regularly --- two closely related things, but it's important here to draw the fine distinction between them. The assumption is that those two things go together. In a way, this is a hard assumption to spot, because we naturally assume, and might even take for granted, that (a) & (b) go together. Sometimes, the hardest to spot assumptions are the most obvious ones.

So, for our assumption, we want something that links (a)getting tickets for speeding to (b)exceeding the speed limit regularly. This is exactly what answer B does.

Does that make sense? Here's a similar CR question:
https://gmat.magoosh.com/questions/1280

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Mike :-)
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
https://gmat.magoosh.com/