pure zoo aquariums

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 1:59 am
Location: Mumbai
Thanked: 1 times

pure zoo aquariums

by abby_g » Fri Oct 06, 2006 9:56 pm
. In the United States, vacationers account for more
than half of all visitors to what are technically called
“pure aquariums” but for fewer than one quarter of
all visitors to zoos, which usually include a “zoo
aquarium” of relatively modest scope.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to account
for the difference described above between visitors to
zoos and visitors to pure aquariums?
(A) In cities that have both a zoo and a pure
aquarium, local residents are twice as likely to
visit the aquarium as they are to visit the zoo.
(B) Virtually all large metropolitan areas have zoos,
whereas only a few large metropolitan areas
have pure aquariums.
(C) Over the last ten years, newly constructed pure
aquariums have outnumbered newly established
zoos by a factor of two to one.
(D) People who visit a zoo in a given year are two
times more likely to visit a pure aquarium that
year than are people who do not visit a zoo.
(E) The zoo aquariums of zoos that are in the same
city as a pure aquarium tend to be smaller than
the aquariums of zoos that have no pure
aquarium nearby.


answers follow after someone replies.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 7:10 am

pure zoo aquariums

by juhi » Sun Oct 08, 2006 5:59 am
is the ans c??

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 7:10 am

pure zoo aquariums

by juhi » Sun Oct 08, 2006 6:00 am
is the ans c??

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Jul 09, 2006 7:10 am

pure zoo aquariums

by juhi » Sun Oct 08, 2006 6:01 am
is the ans c??

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 1:59 am
Location: Mumbai
Thanked: 1 times

by abby_g » Sun Oct 08, 2006 6:08 am
The answer is B. i think they solve it this way.

Since the vacationers are ones who will visit both the zoos and the pure acquariums. So if the they amount to more than half of the visitors to pure aquariums and account to less than one-quarter of all visitors to zoos indicates that there are more zoos than there are pure aquariums.

I think moderators can better explain this question, since i'm not that good with CRs.

Community Manager
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:17 am
Location: New York, NY

by ianstrike » Sun Oct 08, 2006 8:00 pm
Where is this from ?
------------

The reason that I ask is that it seems to me that it's not a very good Q.

In other words, I'd be surprised if it's an actual GMAC, TPR, Manhattan GMAT or Kaplan Q.

There are problems with the question ...
Ian Streicher

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 12:00 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:9 members

by prachipareekh » Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:01 pm
Straight B

Visitors at Zoo aquariums < Visitors at Pure aquariums => "pure aquariums" are less common in cities.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 1:59 am
Location: Mumbai
Thanked: 1 times

by abby_g » Mon Oct 09, 2006 12:12 am
This is question is from the question papers (30 mins). I got it from this site some one month back.
To err is human, to repeat it is criminal.

Community Manager
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:17 am
Location: New York, NY

by ianstrike » Tue Oct 10, 2006 6:35 am
The answer is indeed B. Having said that, B is NOT a great answer. (But it's better than the other 4.)

The argument says that 'vacationers account for more than half of the visitors to aquariums.' Just to be clear, this doesn't mean that half of all the vacationers go to aquariums. It means that half of the folks who go to aquariums ARE vacationers. Same deal with the zoos: 1/4 of the zoo visitors are vacationers. For all we know only 100 people go to aquariums, while 10,000 go to zoos. If that were the case, only 51 or so of those 100 aquarium visitors would need to be tourists while as many as 2,499 of the 10,000 zoo guests might be tourists.

So we don't need info suggesting that there are more aquariums than zoos (or vice versa) or more people who go to zoos than aquariums (or vice versa). All of that is irrelevant.

What we do need is some reason to suggest that a greater % of the aquaruium visitors are on vacation than the zoo visitors. The unstated concept here is PROXIMITY. B is the only answer that relates to that.

CR questions often give us the opportunity to confuse percentages. (ie Is it that more people visit aquariums than zoos or that more of the aquarium-visitors - whatever the actual number is - ARE tourists.


Another way to answer the Q is to do what TPR refers to as POE (Process of elimination). In other words, don't look for the correct answer but find 4 crappy answers to reject. For example:

(A) is too specific - this only compares the cities that have both ... why should our focus be limited to that?

(C) is also too specific. The newly constructed limitation ignores the possible fact that the ratio of EXISTING zoo and aquariums is different.

(D) Unrelated out of scope comparison.

(E) Same problem as D.

I hope that this helps.
Ian Streicher

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 5:34 am
Location: India
Thanked: 310 times
Followed by:123 members
GMAT Score:750

by cans » Sat Sep 17, 2011 7:55 am
IMO B
If my post helped you- let me know by pushing the thanks button ;)

Contact me about long distance tutoring!
[email protected]

Cans!!