In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 19 Jan 2017, 18:07

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Aug 2010
Posts: 260
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 553 [0], given: 11

In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Dec 2010, 12:32
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

46% (02:05) correct 54% (01:09) wrong based on 61 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Gmat: everything-you-need-to-prepare-for-the-gmat-revised-77983.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ajit

If you have any questions
New!
Kaplan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Posts: 148
Location: Toronto
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 186 [1] , given: 0

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Dec 2010, 13:04
1
KUDOS
ajit257 wrote:
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.

did not get this one ...the ans choices do not make sense to me.

Step 1 of the Kaplan Method for CR: focus on the question stem

We see we have a weaken EXCEPT question; so, the 4 wrong answers will weaken the argument and the correct answer will either strengthen the argument or be outside the scope (i.e. irrelevant).

Step 2 of the Kaplan Method for CR: untangle the stimulus

For weaken/strengthen/assumption questions, we find the author's conclusion, summarize her evidence and then identify her assumptions.

C: US needs better safety belts for protection (or, put another way: current US safety belts aren't good enough).

E: injuries are more severe in US car accidents than in European car accidents.
E: European law requires different type of seat belt.

A: US-style seat belts account for the more severe injuries.

Step 3 of the Kaplan Method for CR: think about/predict an answer

It's going to be much tougher to predict the correct answer to an EXCEPT question, but we can think about what would weaken the argument to help us eliminate the wrong choices.

Here, the author is assuming that the seat belts are responsible for the more severe injuries; so, anything that makes us thing that the seat belts are NOT responsible will weaken the argument.

Step 4 of the Kaplan Method for CR: evaluate the choices

(A) Europeans are more likely to wear safety belts than are people in the United States.

Is this an alternative reason why there are more serious injuries in the US? YES - it's not defective seat belts, it's people not wearing them. Weakens, so eliminate (A).

(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.

Is this an alternative reason why there are more serious injuries in the US? YES - it's not defective seat belts, it's driver training. Weakens, so eliminate (B).

(C) Cars built for the European market tend to have more sturdy construction than do cars built for the United States market.

Is this an alternative reason why there are more serious injuries in the US? YES - it's not defective seat belts, it's the rest of the car. Weakens, so eliminate (C).

(D) Automobile passengers in the United States have a greater statistical chance of being involved in an accident than do passengers in Europe.

Is this an alternative reason why there are more serious injuries in the US? NO! This is a reason why US drivers would get involved in more accidents, but the argument is about severity of injuries in accidents - a completely different topic. Outside the scope: choose (D).

(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.

Is this an alternative reason why there are more serious injuries in the US? NO. However, does this make us think that there must be another reason? YES, since US drivers using the new seat belts are still suffering from more severe injuries than their European counterparts. Weakens, so eliminate (E).
Senior Manager
Status: Bring the Rain
Joined: 17 Aug 2010
Posts: 406
Location: United States (MD)
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: Michigan (Ross) - Class of 2014
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V39
GPA: 3.13
WE: Corporate Finance (Aerospace and Defense)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 46

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2010, 11:50
Great explanation.

Thanks
_________________
Intern
Joined: 27 Sep 2010
Posts: 23
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 70

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Dec 2010, 07:19
I am still confused between D & E. I thought E is right answer.
Manager
Status: One last try =,=
Joined: 11 Jun 2010
Posts: 141
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 32

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Apr 2011, 23:29
E cannot be the correct answer.
Quote:
(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.

Conclusion: United States needs to adopt more stringent standards for safety belt design to protect automobile passengers better.

If E says that there is no reduction in injuries in states that have recently begun the European safety belt, then will the US conclude that it needs to adopt the safety belt design to decrease the injuries? NO.

Actually, E weakens the conclusion. So E is not the correct answer here.

Analogy:
You are sick and you are taking medicine Z to cure your disease. Your mother tells you that when you were younger, you took medicine Z but you did not feel better. So are you still keen on using medicine Z?
_________________

There can be Miracles when you believe

Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 920
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 341 [0], given: 123

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Apr 2011, 23:58
I agree. I have another perspective. E means that the effect was already present before the cause. No change is equivalent to "same" effect.

windofchange wrote:
E cannot be the correct answer.
Quote:
(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.

Conclusion: United States needs to adopt more stringent standards for safety belt design to protect automobile passengers better.

If E says that there is no reduction in injuries in states that have recently begun the European safety belt, then will the US conclude that it needs to adopt the safety belt design to decrease the injuries? NO.

Actually, E weakens the conclusion. So E is not the correct answer here.

Analogy:
You are sick and you are taking medicine Z to cure your disease. Your mother tells you that when you were younger, you took medicine Z but you did not feel better. So are you still keen on using medicine Z?
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 285
Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: HBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 188 [0], given: 13

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Apr 2011, 00:54
The argument is saying that better safety belt would mean lesser injuries. any option that counters this is going to weaken the argument
Option A says that people dont wear seat belt as strictly in US..how would a better seatbelt be able to help if it is not worn? Hence this weakens.
Option B and C bring to fore other reasons which might be responsible for better passenger security in europe than seatbelt quality - better trained drivers, better cars etc. this therefore weakens the conclusion
Option E is directly countering by giving contaradictory example of how better seatbelt hasnt caused the result that argument supposes it to do. Thus weakens.

Option D says that there is higher probability of accidents in US- that doesnt say whether better seatbelts may result is better security or not. Hence this doesnt weaken.
VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1353
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 240 [0], given: 10

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jun 2011, 01:52
D is plain and simple
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers   [#permalink] 16 Jun 2011, 01:52
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
12 In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in 16 20 Jan 2010, 09:15
1 In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in 6 18 Aug 2009, 18:30
1 In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in 3 31 Jul 2008, 18:30
4 In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in 8 29 Jan 2008, 19:31
It is not correct that the people of the United States, 4 12 Mar 2007, 20:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by