BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Inference question : Help

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 10:29 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:640

Inference question : Help

by praveen_gmat » Fri Oct 14, 2011 10:56 am
Improved technology and equipment often result in fewer injuries during high-risk activities such as rock climbing and scuba diving. But participant education also plays a large role in reducing the number of injuries sustained during these activities. People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment. Which of the following can be properly inferred from the
information above?
"¢ Training is a more important safety factor than equipment in high-risk activities.
"¢ People who are properly trained in their activities do not sustain injuries.
"¢ The safety benefits of the latest equipment can be offset by inadequate preparation.
"¢ Rock climbing and scuba diving are more risky than any other activities.
"¢ People with the latest equipment often neglect proper training.

The OA is C. But I disagree. Preparation and Education are not same. Preparation according to me is out of scope. Why should one not eliminate C based on this logic?

In the last line of the question its mentioned that "People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment.", which implies that training is more important.

C talks about preparation and not about education. Preparation could mean anything beyond education...So it is out of scope.

Any inputs?
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 217
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 9:42 pm
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:2 members

by garima99 » Fri Oct 14, 2011 11:50 am
praveen_gmat wrote:Improved technology and equipment often result in fewer injuries during high-risk activities such as rock climbing and scuba diving. But participant education also plays a large role in reducing the number of injuries sustained during these activities. People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment. Which of the following can be properly inferred from the
information above?
"¢ Training is a more important safety factor than equipment in high-risk activities.: can t say maybe if the equipment are faulty then the training would be of no use
"¢ People who are properly trained in their activities do not sustain injuries.: it says high risk...wrong ans
"¢ The safety benefits of the latest equipment can be offset by inadequate preparation. here preparation can be linked to training.
"¢ Rock climbing and scuba diving are more risky than any other activities.
"¢ People with the latest equipment often neglect proper training.

The OA is C. But I disagree. Preparation and Education are not same. Preparation according to me is out of scope. Why should one not eliminate C based on this logic?

In the last line of the question its mentioned that "People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment.", which implies that training is more important.

C talks about preparation and not about education. Preparation could mean anything beyond education...So it is out of scope.

Any inputs?
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 416
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:48 am
Thanked: 28 times
Followed by:6 members

by gunjan1208 » Fri Oct 14, 2011 11:06 pm
In additon to what Garima says, I will say that you try to challenge other 4 choices and they fade away in front of C.
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:24 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by catfreak » Sat Oct 15, 2011 12:15 pm
C is the answer.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:33 pm
Thanked: 158 times
Followed by:21 members

by pemdas » Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:01 pm
This is an inference type or a parallel reasoning question. The most difficult in critical reading and reading comprehension sections of GMAT follower grad admission exam - GRE and the pure GMAT content applicable critical reasoning section.
try analyzing wrong choices - why A through E can be wrong and one answer only is correct
a) this is an extreme choice or assumes too much. We are left to compare training with equipment given that the equipment has been provided in the stimuli text, whereas here we face comparison of training with the equipment without assuming that the equipment has been provided or not. To prove this let's turn to stimuli which says that both are important, but training is more important provided that the equipment has been provided already;
b)this is too narrow choice, we are told that people who are trained experience fewer injuries and not that they do not sustain injuries at all;
c) let's leave out this choice for a moment as we are evaluating our question (we will turn to answer choice c later) to employ the higher older thinking as Brian Galvin explained here: https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/10/ ... r-thinking
d) here we are presented so called "rotten fruit" choice. Remember when we make shopping in pazaar we are offered by the seller who wants to take advantage of us the bad or spoiled fruits in hopes that we can't recognize them as long as we don't taste them or don't know for sure what's bad in them to make them spoiled. The same here we are told that rock climbing and scuba diving are examples of high-risk activities, note "are more risky than any other activities" - because the expression "any other" assumes everything, even high-risky activities. So it turns out in choice d that rock climbing and scuba diving can be more risky that high-risk activities too? clearly incorrect
e) this is out of scope choice, that is not in any place in the stimuli (text) we are told that people with the latest equipment neglect training. Instead we are told somewhere in the stimuli that people are poorly trained and have the best equipment run risk of injury. This is however not to be understood as people who have the best equipment (always) have poor training. So out of scope and incorrect as a and b answer choices above.

Now with the answer choice c we have - The safety benefits of the latest equipment can be offset by inadequate preparation.

We can understand from answer choice c that even if the latest equipment is provided, its benefits can not disallow people to run risk of injury yet. Why? Because of inadequate training. That's exactly what was reasoned in our stimuli (text). Answer choice c is correct!
praveen_gmat wrote: The OA is C. But I disagree. Preparation and Education are not same. Preparation according to me is out of scope. Why should one not eliminate C based on this logic?

In the last line of the question its mentioned that "People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment.", which implies that training is more important.

C talks about preparation and not about education. Preparation could mean anything beyond education...So it is out of scope.

Any inputs?
Success doesn't come overnight!
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1