The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 03 Dec 2016, 04:43

### 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

# The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 18 Mar 2009
Posts: 17
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [1] , given: 1

The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2010, 01:13
1
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

48% (02:46) correct 52% (01:27) wrong based on 112 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and under has nearly doubled in the past 8 years. It is clear that this increase has prevented child fatalities that otherwise would have occurred, because although the number of children aged 4 and under who were killed while riding in cars involved in accidents rose 10 percent over the past 8 years, the total number of serious automobile accidents rose by 20 percent during that period.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Some of the automobile safety seats purchased for children under 4 continue to be used after the child reaches the age of 5.
(B) The proportion of serious automobile accidents involving child passengers has remained constant over the past 8 years.
(C) Children are taking more trips in cars today than they were 8 years ago, but the average total time they spend in cars has remained constant.
(D) The sharpest increase in the use of automobile safety seats over the past 8 years has been for children over the age of 2.
(E) The number of fatalities among adults involved in automobile accidents rose by 10 percent over the past 8 years.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
QA 8
If you have any questions
New!
Intern
Joined: 02 Apr 2010
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2010, 15:44
whats the QA??? is it B??
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 250
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 16

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2010, 02:07
tough one. between B and C I pick B.
It is difficult one for an explanation.

Last edited by Indien on 04 Apr 2010, 23:00, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Posts: 221
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 8

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2010, 04:55
I would pick B
_________________

Success is my Destiny

Manager
Joined: 28 Aug 2009
Posts: 196
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 79 [1] , given: 1

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2010, 06:07
1
KUDOS
clearly B

Argument says: % of serious accidents rose 20% but child fatality rose only 10%
so child fatality must have been reduced by safety gear

But what if the proportion of accidents invloving child fatalities itself decreased by lets say 90%,then the proportioante rise in death of children under 4 should have been somewhere around 2% which is far less than 10%.

Here the stimulus comes in to say that No,THE PRPORTION REMAINED SAME and clarifies that no such decrease took place and seals the argument.
SVP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1558
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 558 [0], given: 6

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2010, 19:34
will appreciate if someone can provide a more detailed explanation on this
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 326
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 88 [0], given: 44

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2010, 22:17
I think it's B..
_________________

"Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiam." - Winston Churchill

As vs Like - Check this link : http://www.grammar-quizzes.com/like-as.html.

Intern
Joined: 21 Feb 2010
Posts: 33
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 9

### Show Tags

26 Apr 2010, 13:06
The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and under has nearly doubled in the past 8 years. It is clear that this increase has prevented child fatalities that otherwise would have occurred, because although the number of children aged 4 and under who were killed while riding in cars involved in accidents rose 10 percent over the past 8 years, the total number of serious automobile accidents rose by 20 percent during that period.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) Some of the automobile safety seats purchased for children under 4 continue to be used after the child reaches the age of 5.

I'm newbie in CR.
Maybe I undeerstood wrong all conception of the Strengthen questions.
I thought the answer is A.
We need to prove cause, and the cause here is 'increase of child fatalities'.
And the effect is "doubling children seates by children aged 4 and under".
so, answer A says "yes, increase of child fatalities was because seats purchased for children under 4 continue to be used after the child reaches the age of 5"
Can somebody explaine where my mistake is, please?
Manager
Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Posts: 195
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 29

### Show Tags

26 Apr 2010, 16:46
B is closer. We can rule out A since we are only looking at kids <= 4yrs of age and data pertaining to that. the key here in the question is that we have to focus on accident numbers of kids 4 yr and under....hope this helps
Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 954
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 76

Kudos [?]: 1245 [0], given: 40

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2010, 00:09
IMO B.

The conclusion - It is clear that this increase has prevented child fatalities that otherwise would have occurred.

Best supporting premise: fatalities that otherwise would have occurred.

HAS PREVENTED is the catch here. If the safety seats has preveneted the fatalities for the 8 yrs then the use of safety seats is justified. Choice B is indicating this.

(B) The proportion of serious automobile accidents involving child passengers has remained constant over the past 8 years.

arghya05 wrote:
The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and under has nearly doubled in the past 8 years. It is clear that this increase has prevented child fatalities that otherwise would have occurred, because although the number of children aged 4 and under who were killed while riding in cars involved in accidents rose 10 percent over the past 8 years, the total number of serious automobile accidents rose by 20 percent during that period.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Some of the automobile safety seats purchased for children under 4 continue to be used after the child reaches the age of 5.
(B) The proportion of serious automobile accidents involving child passengers has remained constant over the past 8 years.
(C) Children are taking more trips in cars today than they were 8 years ago, but the average total time they spend in cars has remained constant.
(D) The sharpest increase in the use of automobile safety seats over the past 8 years has been for children over the age of 2.
(E) The number of fatalities among adults involved in automobile accidents rose by 10 percent over the past 8 years.

[Reveal] Spoiler:
QA 8

_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

SVP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1558
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 558 [0], given: 6

### Show Tags

27 Apr 2010, 12:22
can someone provide a detailed explanation on how (B) strengthens the argument?
Manager
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Posts: 83
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2010, 07:06
When I encounter question that is too time consuming to understand, I just scan the keyword in each answer choice for POE:
(A) Some of the automobile safety seats purchased for children under 4 continue to be used after the child reaches the age of 5.-Children over 5 is out of scope
(B) The proportion of serious automobile accidents involving child passengers has remained constant over the past 8 years.-proportion is usually related to %-keep this one
(C) Children are taking more trips in cars today than they were 8 years ago, but the average total time they spend in cars has remained constant.- again out of scope
(D) The sharpest increase in the use of automobile safety seats over the past 8 years has been for children over the age of 2.-not pertaining to the subject matter
(E) The number of fatalities among adults involved in automobile accidents rose by 10 percent over the past 8 years.- not pertaining to subject matter

Going back to B, I still cant understand how they are related, but since every other choice is out of scope, I would keep B , finger crossed of course
Intern
Joined: 23 Aug 2010
Posts: 5
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 30

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2010, 10:38
The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and under has nearly doubled in the past 8 years. It is clear that this increase has prevented child fatalities that otherwise would have occurred, because although the number of children aged 4 and under who were killed while riding in cars involved in accidents rose 10 percent over the past 8 years, the total number of serious automobile accidents rose by 20 percent during that period.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Some of the automobile safety seats purchased for children under 4 continue to be used after the child reaches the age of 5.
(B) The proportion of serious automobile accidents involving child passengers has remained constant over the past 8 years.
(C) Children are taking more trips in cars today than they were 8 years ago, but the average total time they spend in cars has remained constant.
(D) The sharpest increase in the use of automobile safety seats over the past 8 years has been for children over the age of 2.
(E) The number of fatalities among adults involved in automobile accidents rose by 10 percent over the past 8 years.

Conclusion:The increase in the use of automobile safety has prevented child fatalities
Evidence :
The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and under has nearly doubled in the past 8 years.
The number of children aged 4 and under who were killed while riding in cars involved in accidents rose 10 percent over the past 8 years
The total number of serious automobile accidents rose by 20 percent during that period.

Note ,how suttle the difference is ,the conclusion talks of preventing child fatalities and evidence talks of serious automobile accidents which can include children ,teenagers ,etc all age groups ,But if its given liek in (B)that the proportion of serious fatalities in children amongst this vast group remained same ,it definitedly strengthens the conclusion ,

For example let in 1900 ,the no of child accident =100,in 1908 it shall be 110 (10%more)

let total no of serious accidents in 1900=1000 ,in 1908 it shall be 1200 (20%more)but we know that child fatalities are fixed at 10% proportion ,so compared to other age group fatalities ,they have decreased if we are to assume that their proportion is fixed over the last 10 years ,a period during which serious accidents over other age groups rose over 20%.

I hope its now clear to all ,

Humble Regards ,

Amlan Dutta
Senior Manager
Joined: 31 Mar 2010
Posts: 415
Location: Europe
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 26

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2010, 10:53
I pick B.

I'm currently working on CR with the PowerScore bible, so I'll apply their techniques:

First find the conclusion (if any):
Quote:
It is clear that this increase has prevented child fatalities that otherwise would have occurred

Now we need to find answers that strengthen this conclusion. Well, except B they do not add any value to the conclusion, as they mostly bring in irrelevant information.
Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Posts: 225
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 276 [0], given: 16

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2010, 14:32
IMO b - defo a diff one : )
Manager
Joined: 16 Mar 2010
Posts: 184
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 168 [0], given: 9

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2010, 01:18
easy B
Manager
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 85
Location: United States (AL)
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 22

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2010, 00:37
B it is
Manager
Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 143
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2010, 04:15
i think B
Manager
Joined: 08 Feb 2010
Posts: 143
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2010, 04:20
picked B.......
Intern
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 46
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2010, 11:29
Eden wrote:
When I encounter question that is too time consuming to understand, I just scan the keyword in each answer choice for POE:
(A) Some of the automobile safety seats purchased for children under 4 continue to be used after the child reaches the age of 5.-Children over 5 is out of scope
(B) The proportion of serious automobile accidents involving child passengers has remained constant over the past 8 years.-proportion is usually related to %-keep this one
(C) Children are taking more trips in cars today than they were 8 years ago, but the average total time they spend in cars has remained constant.- again out of scope
(D) The sharpest increase in the use of automobile safety seats over the past 8 years has been for children over the age of 2.-not pertaining to the subject matter
(E) The number of fatalities among adults involved in automobile accidents rose by 10 percent over the past 8 years.- not pertaining to subject matter

Going back to B, I still cant understand how they are related, but since every other choice is out of scope, I would keep B , finger crossed of course

Thanks for the explanation.

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 26 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
10 Ten years ago , the country of Vorland adopted new automobile safety 7 19 Jun 2016, 10:26
Automobile Dealer's Advertisement: The Highway Traffic Safety Institu 4 05 Sep 2015, 19:36
There is clear evidence that the mandated use of safety seat 1 21 Jul 2014, 18:29
The most effective restraint for rear seat automobile 14 11 Jun 2008, 06:03
The use of automobile safety seats by children aged 4 and 13 18 Feb 2007, 08:26
Display posts from previous: Sort by