Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
07 Aug 2013, 15:48
Kudos
Bookmarks
We'll attack this question with some framework + prethinking.
Framework: Expectation vs Actuality
Pre-thinking: Link the two relevant topics
This question starts off with the expectation vs actuality framework
Expectation: 3% (low percentage) with radar detectors ->might expect 3% of ticketed cars to have radar detectors
Actuality: 3% (low percentage) with radar detectors -> actually 33% of ticketed cars have radar detectors
Conclusion: Those using radar detectors are MORE likely to exceed speed limit REGULARLY.
Keep in mind that the word "regularly" adds a dimension of "degree" into the conclusion. It's not a simple relationship between "detector = speed more", but rather "detector = consistently speed more"
So our pre-thinking should be to find an answer choice that connects those two topics:
1) something to do with "detector"
2) something to do with "consistently speeding more" -- keyword 'consistently' is important
(B) [Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit ] are [ more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly]
than are drivers who are not ticketed.
So does (B) talk about the detector? Not directly BUT it does so indirectly.
[Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit ]
We already established before that a good percentage of those who are ticketed (33%) are those WITH detectors. Thus (B) is already referencing this segment of the population. Then the second half says this group (those with detectors) are more likely to exceed the speed limit REGULARLY -- fully captures the conclusion we had. In fact, it almost sounds like a repeat of the conclusion -- but it does so by substituting that first part ("detectors") with something slightly different.
(A) [ Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors ] are [less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed
limit ] than are drivers who do not.
1) "detector" -- YES
2) "consistently speeding more" -- NO, goes in opposite direction and says LESS likely.
(C) [ The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit ] was greater than the number of
vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
1) "detector" -- no, this is talking about the # of vehicles...not the population of those that speeded. Notice the other answer choices reference "drivers" -- not "the number of vehicles"
2) "consistently speeding more" -- no
(D) [ Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit ] were ticketed more than once in the
time period covered by the report.
1) "detector" -- no, this is talking about some detail about a portion of the vehicles -- we only care about the drivers that used the "detector" -- not the details about some irrelevant segment
2) "consistently speeding more" -- no
(E) [ Drivers on Maryland highways ] exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state
highways not covered in the report.
1) "detector"-- no, talks about drivers in Maryland as a whole. The conclusion only cares about drivers who used the detector, not the whole group.
Framework: Expectation vs Actuality
Pre-thinking: Link the two relevant topics
This question starts off with the expectation vs actuality framework
Expectation: 3% (low percentage) with radar detectors ->might expect 3% of ticketed cars to have radar detectors
Actuality: 3% (low percentage) with radar detectors -> actually 33% of ticketed cars have radar detectors
Conclusion: Those using radar detectors are MORE likely to exceed speed limit REGULARLY.
Keep in mind that the word "regularly" adds a dimension of "degree" into the conclusion. It's not a simple relationship between "detector = speed more", but rather "detector = consistently speed more"
So our pre-thinking should be to find an answer choice that connects those two topics:
1) something to do with "detector"
2) something to do with "consistently speeding more" -- keyword 'consistently' is important
(B) [Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit ] are [ more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly]
than are drivers who are not ticketed.
So does (B) talk about the detector? Not directly BUT it does so indirectly.
[Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit ]
We already established before that a good percentage of those who are ticketed (33%) are those WITH detectors. Thus (B) is already referencing this segment of the population. Then the second half says this group (those with detectors) are more likely to exceed the speed limit REGULARLY -- fully captures the conclusion we had. In fact, it almost sounds like a repeat of the conclusion -- but it does so by substituting that first part ("detectors") with something slightly different.
(A) [ Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors ] are [less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed
limit ] than are drivers who do not.
1) "detector" -- YES
2) "consistently speeding more" -- NO, goes in opposite direction and says LESS likely.
(C) [ The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit ] was greater than the number of
vehicles that were equipped with radar detectors.
1) "detector" -- no, this is talking about the # of vehicles...not the population of those that speeded. Notice the other answer choices reference "drivers" -- not "the number of vehicles"
2) "consistently speeding more" -- no
(D) [ Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit ] were ticketed more than once in the
time period covered by the report.
1) "detector" -- no, this is talking about some detail about a portion of the vehicles -- we only care about the drivers that used the "detector" -- not the details about some irrelevant segment
2) "consistently speeding more" -- no
(E) [ Drivers on Maryland highways ] exceeded the speed limit more often than did drivers on other state
highways not covered in the report.
1) "detector"-- no, talks about drivers in Maryland as a whole. The conclusion only cares about drivers who used the detector, not the whole group.
04 Oct 2014, 22:23
Kudos
Bookmarks
A) Drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are less likely to be ticketed for exceeding the speed limit than are drivers who do not. Negating the Conclusion
B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
Correct
C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with the radar detectors.
Restatement of the Premise
D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
Negation : Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were not ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report. This does not break the conclusion.Also the premise talks about the number of vehicles and not the number of tickets.
E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceed the speed limit more often than drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.
Out of Scope
B) Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed.
Correct
C) The number of vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding speed limit was greater than the number of vehicles that were equipped with the radar detectors.
Restatement of the Premise
D) Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report.
Negation : Many of the vehicles that were ticketed for exceeding the speed limit were not ticketed more than once in the time period covered by the report. This does not break the conclusion.Also the premise talks about the number of vehicles and not the number of tickets.
E) Drivers on Maryland highways exceed the speed limit more often than drivers on other state highways not covered in the report.
Out of Scope
29 Jun 2015, 19:39
Kudos
Bookmarks
Here's what we know:
"Of the people who got tickets -- many had a radar machine. Therefore, if you had a radar, you were more likely to GET A SPEEDING TICKET."
That's what we know based on past results.
But the author says something slightly different:
"Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT REGULARLY."
Well, "more likely to get a speeding ticket" is not the same as "more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly"
They are close -- but they are not exactly the same.
So how did the author jump from the first to the second?
What's the link here between "speeding ticket" and "exceeding the speed limit regularly"?
We need an answer that mentions both of these terms.
And that's exactly what answer (B) does.
(B) "Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed."
"Of the people who got tickets -- many had a radar machine. Therefore, if you had a radar, you were more likely to GET A SPEEDING TICKET."
That's what we know based on past results.
But the author says something slightly different:
"Clearly, drivers who equip their vehicles with radar detectors are more likely to EXCEED THE SPEED LIMIT REGULARLY."
Well, "more likely to get a speeding ticket" is not the same as "more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly"
They are close -- but they are not exactly the same.
So how did the author jump from the first to the second?
What's the link here between "speeding ticket" and "exceeding the speed limit regularly"?
We need an answer that mentions both of these terms.
And that's exactly what answer (B) does.
(B) "Drivers who are ticketed for exceeding the speed limit are more likely to exceed the speed limit regularly than are drivers who are not ticketed."
)..
