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.

knewton CR

Expert replies
by bblast » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:28 pm
In America, children who are given secondhand clothing tend to come from households with more children. This makes sense, but what is unusual is that children who wear secondhand clothing also tend to be injured accidentally more often than children who do not wear secondhand clothing.

Which of the following statements best explains the conclusion drawn above?


(A) Children who wear secondhand clothing tend to have parents who are more concerned about their safety and well-being.

(B) Children who wear clothing that doesn't fit well are more likely to get their sleeves and cuffs caught on playground equipment and have accidents.

(C) Younger children who come from larger families tend to get injured accidentally at high rates because they tend to engage in rough play with their older siblings.

(D) The youngest child, who gets the most secondhand clothing, is also the most likely to have an accidental injury.

(E) Secondhand clothing is nearly indistinguishable from clothing bought new.

OA after discussions.
Cheers !!

Quant 47-Striving for 50
Verbal 34-Striving for 40

My gmat journey :
https://www.beatthegmat.com/710-bblast-s ... 90735.html
My take on the GMAT RC :
https://www.beatthegmat.com/ways-to-bbla ... 90808.html
How to prepare before your MBA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upz46D7 ... TWBZF14TKW_
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by Frankenstein » Wed Aug 24, 2011 11:42 pm
Hi,

I had trouble solving this question. I couldn't think of such assumption. Anyway, I don't want to answer this as I already know the explanation for this. Let others have a go at this.
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Join the discussion

by Deepthi Subbu » Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:02 am
Caught between B and C , but chose C . I feel thats in line with the premise.
Join the discussion

by sunnyjohn » Thu Aug 25, 2011 1:07 am
IMO : C

I will provide my explanation if my answer is correct.
Join the discussion

by akhilsuhag » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:18 am
B

C is incorrect because the argument never says which one of the children (younger or elder) wears the second hand clothing. It may so happen that parents buy clothing from outside for elder children. The assumpyion that the younger one wears the second hand is IMO incorrect.

OA plz!!
Please press "thanks" if you think my post has helped you.. Cheers!!
Join the discussion

by bblast » Thu Aug 25, 2011 3:13 am
I expected to see a tryst between C and B. OA as per knewton is C.
Cheers !!

Quant 47-Striving for 50
Verbal 34-Striving for 40

My gmat journey :
https://www.beatthegmat.com/710-bblast-s ... 90735.html
My take on the GMAT RC :
https://www.beatthegmat.com/ways-to-bbla ... 90808.html
How to prepare before your MBA:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upz46D7 ... TWBZF14TKW_
Join the discussion

by navami » Thu Aug 25, 2011 4:48 am
Option C looks good here. As this links the ironical statements together. The author says that this is fact that those families have may children. then he states the fact that those who wears the second hand dress get injured more often. Option C explains this.

Option B is also close. But if this is selected you are inferring too much.
This time no looking back!!!
Navami
Join the discussion

by badpoem » Thu Aug 25, 2011 9:29 pm
The premise is about second-hand clothing.

Now B --> Children who wear clothing that doesn't fit well are more likely to get their sleeves and cuffs caught on playground equipment and have accidents.

While in real life, we do tend to imagine that second hand clothing tends to be loose and does not fit well, in this question that is not part of the premise. The author harps on our ability to instantly connect clothing that does not fit well to second hand clothing. Therein lies the trap.

C --> Younger children who come from larger families tend to get injured accidentally at high rates because they tend to engage in rough play with their older siblings.

The premise clearly says - "Children who are given secondhand clothing tend to come from households with more children." So children who wear second hand clothing may not get injured because of their clothing rather get injured because they tend to fight with their siblings. A very unusual angle perhaps, but as it is based purely on the premises, it is true! :)

Hope that helps.
Join the discussion

by kunalm » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:32 pm
IMO C
Join the discussion