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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Safety belt design

Expert replies
by crackgmat007 » Mon Jun 01, 2009 7:17 am
In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in automobile accidents are typically more severe than in Europe, where laws require a different kind of safety belt. It is clear from this that the United States needs to adopt more stringent standards for safety belt design to protect automobile passengers better.
Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) Europeans are more likely to wear safety belts than are people in the United States.
(B) Unlike United States drivers, European drivers receive training in how best to react in the event of an accident to minimize injuries to themselves and to their passengers.
(C) Cars built for the European market tend to have more sturdy construction than do cars built for the United States market.
(D) Automobile passengers in the United States have a greater statistical chance of being involved in an accident than do passengers in Europe.
(E) States that have recently begun requiring the European safety belt have experienced no reduction in the average severity of injuries suffered by passengers in automobile accidents.


Pls explain why D does not weaken
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by sudeep_ar » Mon Jun 01, 2009 7:21 am
In D it is talking about the no. of accidents in US vs. in Europe, not relevant in regard to safety belts.
Join the discussion

Re: Safety belt design

by gmatstud » Mon Jun 01, 2009 7:28 am
IMO D

Let's closely look at the argument: passengers involved in automobile accidents are typically MORE SEVERE than in Europe. Always pay attention to these words. That'll be the key to solution.

A- Europeans likely to wear seat belt so injuries can be less severe: Weakens

B- Due to training that European drivers receive, they are able to handle in situations of accident and the injuries are less severe: weakens

C- European cars are sturdy...so less severe accidents: weakens

D- Here the American passengers have a greater probability of being involved in accidents...Here number of accidents is compared...nothing is talked about severety :). This does not weaken the arguments made

E- No improvement in other states where they use the new design of seatbelt. This weakens argument as something else is playing a role in the severety of accidents.
Join the discussion

Thanks for the reply

by viju9162 » Wed Jun 03, 2009 4:17 pm
Thanks for the good explaination!

Regards,
Viju
Join the discussion

by nicolette » Sun May 15, 2016 2:37 pm
My intuition whispers that it is D
Join the discussion