prada wrote:Guys I have a question. In the question below it is talking about Maltania relative to Italy. However the conclusion states that Maltania's productivity increased it doesn't say anything about Italy so how can answer C be correct? The conclusion talks about Maltania yet the correct answer talks about Italy?
The question asks us what supports the conclusion which again is about Maltania. So how they can claim that the fact that Italys productivity decreased is proof that Maltanias productivity increased? Or is my thinking flawed?

You missed a couple of things.

One of them is that you are not given actual figures for Maltania's productivity. You are given only the differences between Maltania's productivity and Italy's in each of two years. So further information on Italy's productivity is indeed useful for answering questions regarding Maltania's productivity.

The other thing you missed is what's pretty much a classic GMAT trick with the numbers, something about the exact number used when talking about the decrease in productivity experienced by Italy.

Maybe that is enough of a hint for you to answer this on your own now.

Might as well fight it until you get it. There won't be any explanations on the test.

Here you are given the difference between Maltania's and Italy's WFPI and not the actual figures.
Then you are told that the difference has further widened.

Option C correctly supports this statement by saying the Italy's WFPI has reduced
But this decrease does not explain the full wap. The rest of the gap is covered by the increase in Maltania's WFPI.

Hence C

Ahhhh yeah I see, I don't know what I was thinking last night. I think I confused absolute vs relative numbers vs difference etc

thx