It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 15:01

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

5 KUDOS received
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 527 [5], given: 0

A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2009, 01:38
5
This post received
KUDOS
32
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

35% (02:01) correct 65% (02:01) wrong based on 988 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

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.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 527 [5], given: 0

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 875

Kudos [?]: 843 [1], given: 18

Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2009, 05:41
1
This post received
KUDOS
Tricky.
I go with D.
We limit our scope to drivers+front seat passengers, only D in a way strengthens this conclusion by saying more than 50% in the survey were not wearing => 80% injured was a big amount.
What is OA? I may be wrong.. this is interesting.
ritula wrote:
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.

Kudos [?]: 843 [1], given: 18

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 9

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

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2009, 06:54
1
This post received
KUDOS
i think ans is C which states
c)More drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey than rear-seat passengers were very severely injured.

What if the majority of the people injured are sitting in the rear seat . making seat belts mandatory for front seat passengers wont help them .

D ) is explicitly mentioned in the statement, so it doesnt add any further support to the argument.

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

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 635

Kudos [?]: 637 [1], given: 6

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2009, 11:55
1
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
IMO A. I was confused between A and D but finally opted A.

ritula wrote:
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.
-- OOS
(C) More drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey than rear-seat passengers were very severely injured.
-- OOS
(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.
-- OOS


We have to find out why argument believes "wearing seat belts, ... can greatly reduce . risk"? Of course some proof is required to stand this point.
A) see the blue part: were wearing - this does validate the claim
D) were not wearing - this does not validate the claim [extra line of assumption is precarious on GMAT]
_________________

If You're Not Living On The Edge, You're Taking Up Too Much Space

Kudos [?]: 637 [1], given: 6

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2009
Posts: 8

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

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2009, 15:40
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.
-- OOS
(B) Considerably more than 20 percent of drivers and front-seat passengers in Dole County always wear seat belts when traveling by car.
-- OOS
(C) More drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey than rear-seat passengers were very severely injured.
-- Right answer choice
(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.
-- True, but doesn't add any support to the statement to draw conclusion.
(E) Most of the auto accidents reported to police in Dole County do not involve any serious injury.
-- OOS

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

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 01 Mar 2009
Posts: 367

Kudos [?]: 96 [1], given: 24

Location: PDX
Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2009, 16:11
1
This post received
KUDOS
Premise: 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

Conclusion: 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.

Answer is asking for an additional premise to strengthen the conclusion:

(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. - Perfect. Of all the people in the survey 80% of those injured didn't wear seat belts, 20% wore seat belts - which strengthens the conclusion
(B) Considerably more than 20 percent of drivers and front-seat passengers in Dole County always wear seat belts when traveling by car. - Always has no relevance, the argument talks about accidental impact.
(C) More drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey than rear-seat passengers were very severely injured. - Doesn't add anything to strengthen the conclusion
(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. Nothing to support or strengthen the conclusion
(E) Most of the auto accidents reported to police in Dole County do not involve any serious injury.
Out of Scope
_________________

In the land of the night, the chariot of the sun is drawn by the grateful dead

Kudos [?]: 96 [1], given: 24

2 KUDOS received
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1402

Kudos [?]: 437 [2], given: 1

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2009, 19:13
2
This post received
KUDOS
ritula wrote:
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.

If 80% are NOT wearing SB, How can more than 20% wear SB? Wrong.

(B) Considerably more than 20 percent of drivers and front-seat passengers in Dole County always wear seat belts when traveling by car.

Expands scope to all drivers. Wrong


(C) More drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey than rear-seat passengers were very severely injured.

Premise gives a statistic and conclusion makes a judgment on how severity of injuries can be reduced. So seems to connect them.


(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.

Isnt this a restatement or possibly contradiction of the premise. more than 50% means could be <=80% or more than 80%

(E) Most of the auto accidents reported to police in Dole County do not involve any serious injury.

If they dont involve any serious injury at all, belts do not help any thing.



Assumption Q based on connect the premise and conclusion or fill the logical gap.

Kudos [?]: 437 [2], given: 1

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1258

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Mar 2009, 23:32
OA is A

Kudos [?]: 527 [0], given: 0

8 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 108

Kudos [?]: 203 [8], given: 0

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Apr 2009, 10:03
8
This post received
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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?

Explanation:
--------------------
(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. ---> We know from the excerpt that
Drivers + Front-Seat Passengers = Severely Injured (20% Wearing Seat-Belts + 80% Not Wearing Seat-Belts) + Not Severely Injured (No Information)

Now, what if more than 80% of the drivers and front-seat passengers who were NOT severely injured were NOT wearing seat-belts? Using this scenario, we can say that wearing seat-belts will NOT reduce the risk of being severely injured. So the conclusion cannot be properly drawn.

Since we have to show that author's conclusion was properly drawn, we have to show that the scenario I cited above was not possible. To make the above scenario impossible, we can say that more than 80% (actually it should be 100% otherwise these people will come under the category of ‘severely injured’ ones) of the drivers and front-seat passengers who were NOT severely injured were wearing seat-belts. Also, excerpt mentions that 20% people from the severely injured category were wearing seat-belts.

So, if we add people (who were wearing seat-belts) from both the categories (severely injured & not severely injured), we'll arrive at the assumption stated in this option.

(B) Considerably more than 20 percent of drivers and front-seat passengers in Dole County always wear seat belts when traveling by car. ---> Mentions about car. Irrelevant.

(C) More drivers and front-seat passengers in the survey than rear-seat passengers were very severely injured. ---> Will not help us in any way to prove that the conclusion was properly drawn.

(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. ---> This cannot be the assumption in order to arrive at the author’s conclusion.

(E) Most of the auto accidents reported to police in Dole County do not involve any serious injury. ---> Irrelevant.
--------------------

Hope that helps.


Regards,
Technext
_________________

+++ Believe me, it doesn't take much of an effort to underline SC questions. Just try it out. +++
+++ Please tell me why other options are wrong. +++

~~~ The only way to get smarter is to play a smarter opponent. ~~~

Kudos [?]: 203 [8], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 May 2009
Posts: 28

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Aug 2009, 09:25
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.

Pls Attach Explanation With your Ans.

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

3 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Posts: 50

Kudos [?]: 33 [3], given: 0

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2009, 06:41
3
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
A is correct.
Lets say there were 100 cases of "serious" accident. Then 80 of those cases were not wearing seat-belts according to the author. But 20 were. So the author assumes that wearing seat-belts can prevent serious accidents. How can that be? There are 20 cases of serious accident that were wearing seat belts! Then how can the author claim that seat-belts can prevent serious accidents? The only way this can happen is if more than 20 people in the auto-accident survey were wearing seat belts and were not seriously hurt. Choice A provides us with that number- it says more than 20% of ALL accident cases were wearing seat-belts at the time of the accident. Now 20% of ALL cases has to be > 20% of serious cases since "serious cases" is a sub-group of all cases.
Hence answer A.

Kudos [?]: 33 [3], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Mar 2010
Posts: 3

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

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Jul 2010, 05:57
Though A is not a straight forward choice to this question, this is the most appropriate choice.

since the answer must support the conclusion. negating the correct choice must negate the conclusion.

C and E are out of scope. negating D doesn't have any affect on conclusion.
Since B dictates a general truth and doesn't comment about the representative sample in the survey, choice B can be ignored.

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

3 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Posts: 92

Kudos [?]: 232 [3], given: 12

A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Mar 2011, 03:36
3
This post received
KUDOS
27
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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

Kudos [?]: 232 [3], given: 12

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 417

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 16

Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Re: Logic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Mar 2011, 23:19
Can someone clarify why A is OA?
_________________

Never give up,,,

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 16

Expert Post
4 KUDOS received
Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
B
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Posts: 1109

Kudos [?]: 1176 [4], given: 29

Re: Logic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2011, 00:14
4
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
This argument comes to a conclusion about the benefits of seatbelts without providing any data about what happens to people who wear them. Let's look at a similar scenario: Imagine that I perform a study that finds that most people with heart disease are not Dutch. Could I conclude that being Dutch protects against heart disease? No, because most people *without* heart disease aren't Dutch, either! I would have to see some data showing that Dutch people show up more in the general population than they do among heart disease sufferers.

Similarly, if we look at all the people who get in accidents--whether they get injured or not--and we don't see more than 20% wearing their seatbelts, then this data doesn't show that seatbelts are safe. It just shows that not many people wear them. If that's the case, then the conclusion doesn't make much sense--seatbelt wearers appear to be getting injured just as much as everyone else (even more, if they represent *less* than 20% of the group). On the other hand, if the assumption in A is correct, and more than 20% of people who get in accidents have their seatbelts on, then we have to wonder why more of them weren't injured. The conclusion starts to look much better.

I hope that helps!
_________________


Dmitry Farber | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | New York


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile |
Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Kudos [?]: 1176 [4], given: 29

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 417

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 16

Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Re: Logic [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2011, 20:23
Thank you for great explanation!!!
_________________

Never give up,,,

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 16

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 247

Kudos [?]: 402 [0], given: 22

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GMAT 1: 520 Q42 V19
GMAT 2: 540 Q44 V21
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Mar 2012, 03:19
Guys don't you think B can also be correct
_________________

The proof of understanding is the ability to explain it.

Kudos [?]: 402 [0], given: 22

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 351

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 31

Concentration: Operations, Strategy
Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Mar 2012, 05:38
good question indeed
took me time to figure out whats going with the options
_________________

Practice Practice and practice...!!

If my reply /analysis is helpful-->please press KUDOS
If there's a loophole in my analysis--> suggest measures to make it airtight.

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 31

Manager
Manager
avatar
Status: I will not stop until i realise my goal which is my dream too
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 223

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 16

Schools: Johnson '15
Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Mar 2012, 09:02
i go with D too...for the same reasons mentioned by folks above....

because prose says 80% of them who had not worn seat belts were severly injured...so more than 50% were not wearing the set belts support it... isnt it?
_________________

Regards,
Harsha

Note: Give me kudos if my approach is right , else help me understand where i am missing.. I want to bell the GMAT Cat ;)

Satyameva Jayate - Truth alone triumphs

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 16

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 151

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 31

Location: India
Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Mar 2012, 03:17
A over B because a relates directly to the participants of the survey. Wins over B because survey is not necessarily a representative sample of dole county. (for example: survey could have lower proportion of drivers and front seat passengers who war seat belts)

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 31

Re: A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County   [#permalink] 23 Mar 2012, 03:17

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 56 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

A recent survey of all auto accident victims in Dole County

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.