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

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

During the Second World War

Expert replies
by atulmangal » Fri Apr 15, 2011 1:56 pm
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.
Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?

A. Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas
B. Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths
C. Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries
D. Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths
E. Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by MartinK » Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:47 pm
IMO D
Join the discussion

by pemdas » Fri Apr 15, 2011 3:39 pm
one more for D - sampling issue involved.
Join the discussion

by badpoem » Fri Apr 15, 2011 10:06 pm
IMO (D)
10 civilians died. 15 overseas armed members died. So equally dangerous in both places. How many civilians died naturally? Or what was the percentage?

A. Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas --> What purpose would it serve?

B. Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths --> 15-10 = 5. so 5/25. - So does that help? No.

C. Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries - Question here is about a choice between civilians and armed forces. Categorising deaths in the armed forces won't help. No

D. Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths - Ah, percentage! 10/500 civilians died. 15/20 armed members died. So, armed forces more dangerous. Classic weakener.

E. Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces --> Comparing the deaths of different sub-categories? Thumbs down!
Join the discussion

by mundasingh123 » Sat Apr 16, 2011 2:33 am
hi Can u reveal the source pls ?
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Join the discussion

by atulmangal » Sat Apr 16, 2011 3:50 am
OA is D guys

source OG 10
Join the discussion

by AIM GMAT » Sat Apr 16, 2011 7:04 am
IMO D . Agree with pemdas sample data issue .
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
Join the discussion