Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
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.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
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 Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemandStart 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
Start free 5-day trial
Read 563 reviewsTarget Test Prep

Seat Belts

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Subscribe topic
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:21 am
Thanked: 1 times
by gmattester » Thu Aug 14, 2008 6:11 am
A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County found that, of the severely injured drivers and front-seat passengers, 80 percent were not wearing seat belts at the time of their accidents. This indicates that, by wearing seat belts, drivers and front-seat passengers can greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured if they are in an auto accident.
The conclusion above is not properly drawn unless which of the following is true?
(A) Of all the drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey, more than 20 percent were wearing seat belts at the time of their accidents.
(B) Considerably more than 20 percent of drivers and front-seat passengers in Dole County always wear seat belts when traveling by car.
(C) More drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey than rear-seat passengers were very severely injured.
(D) More than half of the drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey were not wearing seat belts at the time of their accidents.
(E) Most of the auto accidents reported to police in Dole County do not involve any serious injury.
Top
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 1159
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:35 pm
Thanked: 56 times

by raunekk » Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:25 am
imo:A
Top
Join the discussion
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:21 am
Thanked: 1 times

by gmattester » Thu Aug 14, 2008 7:51 am
OA is "A". Can you plz. explain this
Top
Join the discussion
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:35 am

by geoshieh » Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:31 am
There are 3 scenarios here for survey pools.

1) Total Driver and Passenger (D&P) w/ seat belt = 20%
Total D&P w/o seat belt = 80%

If this was the case, and 80% of severely injured were D&Ps w/o seat belts, then this indicates that there is no greater risk of being severly injured if you didnt wear a seat belt. You have to compare ratios, which in this case is equal.

2) Total D&P w/ seat belt = 10% (less than 20%)
Total D&P w/o seat belt = 90%

In this case if they found 80% of severly injured were D&Ps w/o seat belts, then it shows that you can decrease risk of being severly injured by NOT wearing seatbelts, which weakens the conclusion.

3) Total D&P w/ seat belt = 40% (greater than 20%)
Total D&P w/o seat belt = 60%

Similarly, in this case if they found 80% of severly injured were D&Ps w/o seat belts, then it shows that you increase risk of being severly injured by NOT wearing seatbelts, which is needed to draw the conclusion.

Remember, 60% of the total pool did not wear seatbelts, and 80% of the severly injured did not wear seatbelts, so clearly you have a higher risk of being severly injured by not wearing a seatbelt.

Whereas 40% DID wear a seatbelt, and only 20% of the severly injured did wear seatbelts, so clearly you have a lower risk of being injured.
Top
Join the discussion
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 172
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:21 am
Thanked: 1 times

by gmattester » Thu Aug 14, 2008 1:04 pm
geoshieh wrote:There are 3 scenarios here for survey pools.

1) Total Driver and Passenger (D&P) w/ seat belt = 20%
Total D&P w/o seat belt = 80%

If this was the case, and 80% of severely injured were D&Ps w/o seat belts, then this indicates that there is no greater risk of being severly injured if you didnt wear a seat belt. You have to compare ratios, which in this case is equal.

2) Total D&P w/ seat belt = 10% (less than 20%)
Total D&P w/o seat belt = 90%

In this case if they found 80% of severly injured were D&Ps w/o seat belts, then it shows that you can decrease risk of being severly injured by NOT wearing seatbelts, which weakens the conclusion.

3) Total D&P w/ seat belt = 40% (greater than 20%)
Total D&P w/o seat belt = 60%

Similarly, in this case if they found 80% of severly injured were D&Ps w/o seat belts, then it shows that you increase risk of being severly injured by NOT wearing seatbelts, which is needed to draw the conclusion.

Remember, 60% of the total pool did not wear seatbelts, and 80% of the severly injured did not wear seatbelts, so clearly you have a higher risk of being severly injured by not wearing a seatbelt.

Whereas 40% DID wear a seatbelt, and only 20% of the severly injured did wear seatbelts, so clearly you have a lower risk of being injured.
Thanks ........
I got it.....
Top
Join the discussion
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:33 am

by kris77 » Thu May 12, 2016 12:42 pm
I am leaning more towards A, but I'm not sure about it.
Top
Join the discussion