Last visit was: 12 Jul 2025, 05:42 It is currently 12 Jul 2025, 05:42
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
User avatar
ashutosh_73
Joined: 19 Jan 2018
Last visit: 30 Oct 2024
Posts: 237
Own Kudos:
1,256
 [12]
Given Kudos: 86
Location: India
Posts: 237
Kudos: 1,256
 [12]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
10
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
ayushikamal001
Joined: 30 Jan 2023
Last visit: 11 Jul 2025
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 20
Location: India
Posts: 6
Kudos: 3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
KunalSawant08
Joined: 19 Jan 2024
Last visit: 11 Jul 2025
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
6
 [1]
Given Kudos: 51
Products:
Posts: 5
Kudos: 6
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Neurogenesis
Joined: 28 Apr 2024
Last visit: 12 Jul 2025
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Posts: 8
Kudos: 1
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ashutosh_73
An antitheft device involving an electronic homing beacon has been developed for use in tracking stolen automobiles. Although its presence is undetectable to a car thief and so does not directly deter theft, its use greatly increases the odds of apprehending even the most experienced car thieves. The device is not yet used by a large percentage of car owners, but in cities where only a small percentage of car owners have the device installed, auto thefts have dropped dramatically.

Which one of the following, if true, would most help to explain the dramatic impact of the antitheft device?

(A) Car thieves will tend to be less cautious if they are unaware that a car they have stolen contains a homing beacon.
(B) Typically, the number of cars stolen in cities where the homing beacons are in use was below average before the device was used.
(C) Before the invention of the homing beacon, automobile thieves who stole cars containing antitheft devices were rarely apprehended.
(D) A large proportion of stolen cars are stolen from people who do not live in the cities where they are stolen.
(E) In most cities the majority of car thefts are committed by a few very experienced car thieves.­





An antitheft device involving an electronic homing beacon has been developed for use in tracking stolen automobiles. Although its presence is undetectable to a car thief and so does not directly deter theft, its use greatly increases the odds of apprehending even the most experienced car thieves.
The device is not yet used by a large percentage of car owners, but in cities where only a small percentage of car owners have the device installed, auto thefts have dropped dramatically.

Which one of the following, if true, would most help to explain the dramatic impact of the antitheft device?



Before checking the options, we can see an apparent paradox between: the small percentage of cars with the tracking device (which has no deterrent effect) and the dramatic drop of auto thefts.


(A) Car thieves will tend to be less cautious if they are unaware that a car they have stolen contains a homing beacon.

Then the few thieves stealing the cars in question (we know that the equipped cars represent only a small percentage of the total) will be careless. This can help explain the greater odds of apprehending thieves. However, it does not explain why auto thefts have dropped dramatically despite the small percentage of cars equipped with the device. OUT

(B) Typically, the number of cars stolen in cities where the homing beacons are in use was below average before the device was used.

While the number of stolen cars in such cities was below average, auto thefts have still dropped dramatically, regardless of the starting figure being lower than average. This option aims at lessening the impact of the dramatic drop, but does not offer anything to explain the apparent paradox. OUT

(C) Before the invention of the homing beacon, automobile thieves who stole cars containing antitheft devices were rarely apprehended.

It is specified in the premises that the use of the homing beacon greatly increases the odds of apprehending thieves. The situation before its invention is not really relevant. This just means that more thieves are now apprehended. We cannot infer that just because more thieves are getting caught, it will cause a dramatic drop of auto thefts; after all only a small percentage of cars have the protection. The caught thieves could represent a small percentage of the total thieves. OUT

(D) A large proportion of stolen cars are stolen from people who do not live in the cities where they are stolen.

Where the thieves live is irrelevant to clarify the apparent contradiction. Nothing here helps us explain why auto thefts have dropped dramatically despite the small percentage of cars equipped the device. OUT

(E) In most cities the majority of car thefts are committed by a few very experienced car thieves.­

The same few experienced thieves steal the cars. They steal both the cars tracked by the homing beacon and the cars not equipped (since it cannot be detected). We know that the device greatly increases the odds of getting caught, notwithstanding the amount of experience of the thieves.
Even if a minority of a small group of thieves (say 30%) committing the majority of thefts is apprehended, it can dramatically reduce the number of thefts. CORRECT


E is the best option to explain the dramatic impact of the device.



I hope it helps
User avatar
pk14y
Joined: 15 Aug 2018
Last visit: 11 Jul 2025
Posts: 25
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 165
Posts: 25
Kudos: 10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja

I chose C because it suggests that thieves had confidence that they won't be caught by stealing cars. However, because of the new device, that story has changed and now there is a fear for the consequences, thus deterring them from stealing. This is a logical outcome in the real world.
The only counter is that we don't know what the rate of apprehension was before - it could be very high or low, and thus this answer selection might me mute

I ruled out E because I thought it would be a stretch to suggest that these few experience thieves are stealing cars. Also, is there a big underground network informing other thieves that the big guns got caught, and thus leading to them being scared? That would be a stretch.

I'm not entirely sure about this question, I feel as if you have to extrapolate a lot for the answer choices.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7349 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts