Critical Reasoning

Police statistics have shown that automobile antitheft devices reduce the risk of car theft, but a statistical study of automobile theft by the automobile insurance industry claims that cars equipped with antitheft devices are, paradoxically, more likely to be stolen than cars that are not so equipped.

Which one of the following, if true, does the most to resolve the apparent paradox?

(A) Owners of stolen cars almost invariably report the theft immediately to the police but tend to delay notifying their insurance company, in the hope that the vehicle will be recovered.
(B) Most cars that are stolen are not equipped with antitheft devices, and most cars that are equipped with antitheft devices are not stolen.
(C) The most common automobile antitheft devices are audible alarms, which typically produce ten false alarms for every actual attempted theft.
(D) Automobile owners who have particularly theft-prone cars and live in areas of greatest incidence of car theft are those who are most likely to have antitheft devices installed.
(E) Most automobile thefts are the work of professional thieves against whose efforts antitheft devices offer scant protection.

OA to be posted shortly..

(According to what I know) The correct answer MUST show how two sides can CO-EXIST. And the correct answer MUST conform to the specifics of the stimulus.



(A) Owners of stolen cars almost invariably report the theft immediately to the police but tend to delay notifying their insurance company, in the hope that the vehicle will be recovered.

It talks about stolen cars and not the anti-theft alarm installed cars.

(B) Most cars that are stolen are not equipped with antitheft devices, and most cars that are equipped with antitheft devices are not stolen.

It is just a restatement of the stimulus. It does not resolve the paradox.

(C) The most common automobile antitheft devices are audible alarms, which typically produce ten false alarms for every actual attempted theft.

It does not resolve the paradox. In fact it should lead to more number of police reports.

(D) Automobile owners who have particularly theft-prone cars and live in areas of greatest incidence of car theft are those who are most likely to have antitheft devices installed.

This allows for co-existence of both sides. There are two types of anti-theft-device-installed cars. One is theft prone and another one is not-theft prone. Also the theft-prone anti-theft device installed car is in areas of greatest incidence of car theft. Insurance company stats is correct in the above situation. Just look at the opposite situation. A not-theft prone car installed with anti-theft device in areas of greatest incidence of car theft. In this case the police stats is correct. ( Because the car is not theft prone despite it is installed with anti-theft device)

So, in my view this is the correct answer.

(E) Most automobile thefts are the work of professional thieves against whose efforts antitheft devices offer scant protection.

Explains only the insurance company's studies.

Acorn wrote:(According to what I know) The correct answer MUST show how two sides can CO-EXIST. And the correct answer MUST conform to the specifics of the stimulus.



(A) Owners of stolen cars almost invariably report the theft immediately to the police but tend to delay notifying their insurance company, in the hope that the vehicle will be recovered.

It talks about stolen cars and not the anti-theft alarm installed cars.

(B) Most cars that are stolen are not equipped with antitheft devices, and most cars that are equipped with antitheft devices are not stolen.

It is just a restatement of the stimulus. It does not resolve the paradox.

(C) The most common automobile antitheft devices are audible alarms, which typically produce ten false alarms for every actual attempted theft.

It does not resolve the paradox. In fact it should lead to more number of police reports.

(D) Automobile owners who have particularly theft-prone cars and live in areas of greatest incidence of car theft are those who are most likely to have antitheft devices installed.

This allows for co-existence of both sides. There are two types of anti-theft-device-installed cars. One is theft prone and another one is not-theft prone. Also the theft-prone anti-theft device installed car is in areas of greatest incidence of car theft. Insurance company stats is correct in the above situation. Just look at the opposite situation. A not-theft prone car installed with anti-theft device in areas of greatest incidence of car theft. In this case the police stats is correct. ( Because the car is not theft prone despite it is installed with anti-theft device)

So, in my view this is the correct answer.

(E) Most automobile thefts are the work of professional thieves against whose efforts antitheft devices offer scant protection.

Explains only the insurance company's studies.

Its between A and D
D requires a lot of Assumptions so the closest i come to is A

1. Police say cars with antitheft devices are at a reduced risk to be stolen
2. Insurance companies say cares with devices are more likely to be stolen than those without

A. Incorrect. This would actually weaken both statements if its true

B. Incorrect. This only serves to prove the polices point

C. Incorrect. This has nothing to do with the cars being stolen.

D. Correct. This resolves the two points. This tells us that most people who install antitheft devices live in areas of high crime. So from the polices point of view those cars are less likely to be stolen than those without. From the insurance companies view though it tells you that the people getting antitheft devices are getting them because they are already in an area of high crime whereas those in low areas of crime dont install them. So a car alarm likely means more risk compared to the entire pool of cars because of the location where the car is located.

E. Incorrect. This does not really strengthen either position.

fitzgerald23 wrote:1. Police say cars with antitheft devices are at a reduced risk to be stolen
2. Insurance companies say cares with devices are more likely to be stolen than those without


D. Correct. This resolves the two points. This tells us that most people who install antitheft devices live in areas of high crime. So from the polices point of view those cars are less likely to be stolen than those without. From the insurance companies view though it tells you that the people getting antitheft devices are getting them because they are already in an area of high crime whereas those in low areas of crime dont install them. So a car alarm likely means more risk compared to the entire pool of cars because of the location where the car is located.

E. Incorrect. This does not really strengthen either position.

The bolded part is an assumption.

In my opinion A.

Acorn, but you are assuming that police statistics concentration is on specific area where company's study's concentration is on other specific location? How could you assume this?

In any S,W,A,RP Questions dont we take olny the option as true and we dont assume anything that goes beyond it.What Police thinks is Way beyond what s been give in the Option.
Well considering the unpredicatbility of Some Questions Posted on Forums,I will Not be SHOCKED if the OA is D
Also Police Stats is related to Reports.The Stats consist of Instances of Thefts that are brought to the Notice of the Police