In a jurisdiction where the use of headlights is optional when visibility is good,
drivers who use headlights at all times are less likely to be involved in a collision
than are drivers who use headlights only when visibility is poor. Yet Highway
Safety Department records show that making use of headlights mandatory at
all times does nothing to reduce the overall number of collisions.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy
in the information above?
(A) In jurisdictions where use of headlights is optional when visibility is
good, one driver in four uses headlights for daytime driving in good
weather.
(B) A law making use of headlights mandatory at all times is not especially
difficult to enforce.
(C) Only very careful drivers use headlights when their use is not legally
required.
(D) There are some jurisdictions in which it is illegal to use headlights
when visibility is good.
(E) The jurisdictions where use of headlights is mandatory at all times are
those where daytime visibility is frequently poor.
Source: Verias Prep
This topic has expert replies
- kvcpk
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1893
- Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
- Thanked: 215 times
- Followed by:7 members
IMO C whats the OA?
"Once you start working on something,
don't be afraid of failure and don't abandon it.
People who work sincerely are the happiest."
Chanakya quotes (Indian politician, strategist and writer, 350 BC-275BC)
don't be afraid of failure and don't abandon it.
People who work sincerely are the happiest."
Chanakya quotes (Indian politician, strategist and writer, 350 BC-275BC)
- VivianKerr
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 1035
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:13 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Thanked: 474 times
- Followed by:365 members
It's a "Resolve the Paradox"/"Explain the Discrepancy" question, so immediately our question is, "what IS the paradox?" Identify the two things that seemingly can't occur together.
Fact #1: Headlight usage ---> fewer collisions
Fact #2: Records show headlights doesn't reduce overall #
HOW COME?
- Are the records wrong?
- Most collisions unrelated to headlights?
- Third reason unforeseen?
The correct answer MUST explain WHY mandatory headlights don't reduce total collisions and ALSO why headlights 24/7 reduces crash likelihood. (C) does this. If only super-careful drivers have 24/7 headlights, that explains why they get in fewer crashes. So those risky drivers are getting into collisions regardless of headlights.
Fact #1: Headlight usage ---> fewer collisions
Fact #2: Records show headlights doesn't reduce overall #
HOW COME?
- Are the records wrong?
- Most collisions unrelated to headlights?
- Third reason unforeseen?
The correct answer MUST explain WHY mandatory headlights don't reduce total collisions and ALSO why headlights 24/7 reduces crash likelihood. (C) does this. If only super-careful drivers have 24/7 headlights, that explains why they get in fewer crashes. So those risky drivers are getting into collisions regardless of headlights.
Vivian Kerr
GMAT Rockstar, Tutor
https://www.GMATrockstar.com
https://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles
Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at $150/hr. Contact: [email protected]
Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"!
GMAT Rockstar, Tutor
https://www.GMATrockstar.com
https://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles
Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at $150/hr. Contact: [email protected]
Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"!
Why E is wrong? C says only few drivers use headlights where they are not legally bounded to use headlights. But our paradox says after making it mandatory to use head lights no of accidents aren't falling short. Answer E explains it superbly saying the reason for accident is not the headlight but the typical low visibility in the particular areas.
- David@VeritasPrep
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
- Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
- Thanked: 1186 times
- Followed by:512 members
- GMAT Score:770
This is a Veritas Prep question.
appy_fizz said,
Choice C does not say, "only few drivers use headlights where they are not legally bounded to use headlights." It says that the ONLY drivers who use headlights when not required are very careful drivers.
You see, what you are trying to explain is why DRIVERS who use headlights when they do not have to have so few accidents, given that mandatory use of headlights does not reduce the number of crashes. What this information does is to make it clear that the headlights are not the difference here. Making people use headlights does not help. It must be something about the DRIVERS who CHOOSE to use headlights when they do not have to.
Choice C perfectly captures this. Drivers who choose to use the headlights when they do not have to are the safest drivers and therefore have very few accidents.
Choice E does not say as you state "the reason for accident is not the headlight but the typical low visibility in the particular areas."
It says that those jurisdictions that have made headlight use mandatory at all times are the places with low visibility. Think Alaska or Northern Russia or something. Low visibility during the day most of the year. These are the places where headlights are mandatory at all times.
Yet you are discussing a jurisdiction where the use of headlights is optional, and we know that mandatory headlight use does not help. So the jurisdiction we are discussing is not Siberia or Alaska - since the headlights do not help.
Choice E does not really apply to the paradox. Choice E explains why some places make headlights mandatory. We are trying to explain why making headlights mandatory WOULD NOT HELP.
Choice C explains why it does not help, because it is careful drivers who avoid accidents IN THIS JURISDICTION, not headlight use.
Hope it helps!
appy_fizz said,
The problem is that you have misstated both answer choices!!!Why E is wrong? C says only few drivers use headlights where they are not legally bounded to use headlights. But our paradox says after making it mandatory to use head lights no of accidents aren't falling short. Answer E explains it superbly saying the reason for accident is not the headlight but the typical low visibility in the particular areas
Choice C does not say, "only few drivers use headlights where they are not legally bounded to use headlights." It says that the ONLY drivers who use headlights when not required are very careful drivers.
You see, what you are trying to explain is why DRIVERS who use headlights when they do not have to have so few accidents, given that mandatory use of headlights does not reduce the number of crashes. What this information does is to make it clear that the headlights are not the difference here. Making people use headlights does not help. It must be something about the DRIVERS who CHOOSE to use headlights when they do not have to.
Choice C perfectly captures this. Drivers who choose to use the headlights when they do not have to are the safest drivers and therefore have very few accidents.
Choice E does not say as you state "the reason for accident is not the headlight but the typical low visibility in the particular areas."
It says that those jurisdictions that have made headlight use mandatory at all times are the places with low visibility. Think Alaska or Northern Russia or something. Low visibility during the day most of the year. These are the places where headlights are mandatory at all times.
Yet you are discussing a jurisdiction where the use of headlights is optional, and we know that mandatory headlight use does not help. So the jurisdiction we are discussing is not Siberia or Alaska - since the headlights do not help.
Choice E does not really apply to the paradox. Choice E explains why some places make headlights mandatory. We are trying to explain why making headlights mandatory WOULD NOT HELP.
Choice C explains why it does not help, because it is careful drivers who avoid accidents IN THIS JURISDICTION, not headlight use.
Hope it helps!
- GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
FACT 1: Drivers who use headlights even when visibility is good are less likely to be involved in a collision.phanikpk wrote:In a jurisdiction where the use of headlights is optional when visibility is good,
drivers who use headlights at all times are less likely to be involved in a collision
than are drivers who use headlights only when visibility is poor. Yet Highway
Safety Department records show that making use of headlights mandatory at
all times does nothing to reduce the overall number of collisions.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy
in the information above?
(A) In jurisdictions where use of headlights is optional when visibility is
good, one driver in four uses headlights for daytime driving in good
weather.
(B) A law making use of headlights mandatory at all times is not especially
difficult to enforce.
(C) Only very careful drivers use headlights when their use is not legally
required.
(D) There are some jurisdictions in which it is illegal to use headlights
when visibility is good.
(E) The jurisdictions where use of headlights is mandatory at all times are
those where daytime visibility is frequently poor.
FACT 2: Laws that require drivers to use headlights at all times -- even when visibility is good -- do not reduce the overall number of collisions.
The correct answer choice must explain how both facts can be true at the same time.
C: Only very careful drivers use headlights when their use is not legally required.
This answer choice explains how both facts can be true:
FACT 1: These drivers are less likely to be involved in a collision because they are VERY CAREFUL.
FACT 2: The overall number of collisions is not reduced because drivers who are use headlights only in response to a legal requirement are NOT VERY CAREFUL.
The correct answer is C.
E: The jurisdictions where use of headlights is mandatory at all times are those where daytime visibility is frequently poor.
If visibility is poor, then the use of headlights -- which IMPROVE visibility -- should REDUCE the number of collisions.
Thus, this answer choice does not explain why the number of collisions in these jurisdictions did not decrease.
Eliminate E.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3