The number of patents granted to inventors by the United States Patent

Question

The number of patents granted to inventors by the United States Patent Office dropped from 56000 in 1971 to 45000 in 1978. Spending on research and development, which peaked at 3 percent of the gross national product (GNP) in 1964, was only 2.2 percent of the GNP in 1978. During this period, when United States percentage was steadily decreasing, West Germany and Japan increased the percentage of their GNP???s spent on research and development to 3.2 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively.

Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?

(D) Between 1964 and 1978 the United States consistently spent a larger percentage of its GNP on research and development than did Japan.

Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?

(A) There is direct relationship between the size of a nation’s GNP and the number of inventions it produces.

(B) Japan and Germany spent more money on research and development in 1978 than did the United States.

(C) The amount of money a nation spends on research and development is directly related to the number of inventions patented in that nation.

(D) Between 1964 and 1978 the United States consistently spent a larger percentage of its GNP on research and development than did Japan.

(E) Both West Germany and Japan will soon surpass the United States in the number of patents granted to inventors.

From 1964 to 1978, spending on research and development never fell below 2.2 percent of the GNP in the United States and never rose above 1.6 percent in Japan. Therefore choice D follows from the information given and is the best answer.

Since no information is provided about the size of the GNP of any of the countries mentioned, neither choice A nor choice B is supported. The amount of information given about numbers of patents granted is insufficient to establish any general relation between spending and numbers of patents, so choice C is unsupported; and given that there is no information about the number of inventions patented in Japan and West Germany, choice E is not supported either.

KarishmaB · Accepted Answer

Premises:

- Patents in US dropped from 56000 in 1971 to 45000 in 1978. 
- Spending on R&D, dropped from 3 percent of GNP in 1964, to 2.2 percent of the GNP in 1978. 
- From 1964 to 1978, West Germany and Japan increased R&D spending to 3.2 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively. (So in 1964, their spending was less than 3.2% and 1.6% respectively and they increased it to these numbers by 1978)

(a) There is direct relationship between the size of a nation’s GNP and the number of inventions it produces. 
No link given between the site of GNP and number of inventions in the argument. We might think that often, this will be the case but we are asked for the conclusion supported by the argument given. Hence this will not be our answer.

(b) Japan and Germany spent more money on research and development in 1978 than did the United States 
We don't know the relative GNP of the three countries and hence we cannot say who actually spent more/less money.

(c) The amount of money a nation spends on research and development is directly related to the number of inventions patented in that nation.
Again, the link is not given in the argument. All we are given is that in US, in a certain time frame, number of patents reduced and % of GNP spent on R&D reduced. There is no connection between number roof patents and money spent. Also, even if money spent had also reduced in US in that time frame, it doesn't imply that that will always be the case. A nation could spend a ton of money on R&D but be unable to come up with any inventions.

(d) Between 1964 and 1978 the United States consistently spent a larger percentage of its GNP on research and development than did Japan. 
From 1964 to 1978, Japan increased its % of GNP spending on R & D from a smaller value (say 1%) to 1.6%.
From 1964 to 1978, US decreased its % of GNP spending on R & D from 3% to 2.2%.
In this entire time frame, US is spending more (as a % of GNP) than Japan. Hence, this is correct.

(e) Both West Germany and Japan will soon surpass the United States in the number of patents granted to inventors. 
We have no numbers on the number of patents of both countries hence we cannot conclude this.

Answer (D)

avi84 · Answer

The number of patents granted to inventors by the United States Patent Office dropped from 56000 in 1971 to 45000 in 1978. Spending on research and development, which peaked at 3 percent of the gross national product (GNP) in 1964, was only 2.2 percent of the GNP in 1978. During this period, when United States percentage was steadily decreasing, West Germany and Japan increased the percentage of their GNP???s spent on research and development to 3.2 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively.

Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?

(D) Between 1964 and 1978 the United States consistently spent a larger percentage of its GNP on research and development than did Japan.

Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?

(a) There is direct relationship between the size of a nation’s GNP and the number of inventions it produces.  can not be said

(b) Japan and Germany spent more money on research and development in 1978 than did the United States  can not be said as the figures given are in percentage

(c) The amount of money a nation spends on research and development is directly related to the number of inventions patented in that nation.  incorrect as explained above

(d) Between 1964 and 1978 the United States consistently spent a larger percentage of its GNP on research and development than did Japan.  Correct as from 1964 to 1978 Germany spent 2.2 % ,the lowest in 1978 whereas Japan's is 1.6%, its highest in the same period

(e) Both West Germany and Japan will soon surpass the United States in the number of patents granted to inventors. Incorrect

+1 for D

kavach · Answer

Premises:

- Patents in US dropped from 56000 in 1971 to 45000 in 1978. 
- Spending on R&D, dropped from 3 percent of GNP in 1964, to 2.2 percent of the GNP in 1978. 
- From 1964 to 1978, West Germany and Japan increased R&D spending to 3.2 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively. (So in 1964, their spending was less than 3.2% and 1.6% respectively and they increased it to these numbers by 1978)

(a) There is direct relationship between the size of a nation’s GNP and the number of inventions it produces. 
No link given between the site of GNP and number of inventions in the argument. We might think that often, this will be the case but we are asked for the conclusion supported by the argument given. Hence this will not be our answer.

(b) Japan and Germany spent more money on research and development in 1978 than did the United States 
We don't know the relative GNP of the three countries and hence we cannot say who actually spent more/less money.

(c) The amount of money a nation spends on research and development is directly related to the number of inventions patented in that nation.
Again, the link is not given in the argument. All we are given is that in US, in a certain time frame, number of patents reduced and % of GNP spent on R&D reduced. There is no connection between number roof patents and money spent. Also, even if money spent had also reduced in US in that time frame, it doesn't imply that that will always be the case. A nation could spend a ton of money on R&D but be unable to come up with any inventions.

(d) Between 1964 and 1978 the United States consistently spent a larger percentage of its GNP on research and development than did Japan. 
From 1964 to 1978, Japan increased its % of GNP spending on R & D from a smaller value (say 1%) to 1.6%.
From 1964 to 1978, US decreased its % of GNP spending on R & D from 3% to 2.2%.
In this entire time frame, US is spending more (as a % of GNP) than Japan. Hence, this is correct.

(e) Both West Germany and Japan will soon surpass the United States in the number of patents granted to inventors. 
We have no numbers on the number of patents of both countries hence we cannot conclude this.

Answer (D) 
__________

Hartmati · Answer

I actually believe D) is also incorrect, and this question is flawed.

In my opinion it could (at least theoretically) be possible for Japan to temporarily increasing their % above the one of the U.S. (e.g. from 1% in 1964 to 2.5% in 1970) and then going back down to 1.6% in 1978 for a total increase of 0.6% for the period 1964-1978. This is possible because they were not mentioning that Japan and Germany were steadily increasing their % during the period.

Is there anything I have missed here or could this answer actually be incorrect?
Does it sometimes happen in the GMAT that questions are flawed?

Thanks for your feedback!

daludada · Answer

Dear  karishma ,

If the USA's GNP was $100 and it spent 2.2% of it for R&D, then it spent $2.2

If Japan has a GNP of $1000 and it spent 1.2% of it for R&D, then it spent $12.
Going by the % is a correct way to judge a greater contribution?

can u pl enlighten? VeritasKarishma

KarishmaB · Answer

Yes, percentage is the right way to go about comparing because it is clearly mentioned in the option that the comparison is in percentage terms.

(d) Between 1964 and 1978 the United States consistently  spent a larger percentage of its GNP  on research and development than did Japan.

TheUltimateWinner · Answer

Hello, 
My honorable experts,
 AaronPond ,  RonPurewal ,  MartyTargetTestPrep ,  jennpt ,  AjiteshArun ,  ccooley ,  DmitryFarber ,  GMATNinja ,  egmat ,  generis ,  VeritasKarishma ,  MentorTutoring 
I'm going to make creativity to the author's part so that i can understand this sorta things perfectly. Could you help me to understand the real scenario of this CR, please? 
IF the value   3.2   is replaced with   2.19   can we consider the choice D is still legit?
If not, is there any possibility to make the following choice as legit?
(D1) Between 1964 and 1978 the United States consistently spent a larger percentage of its GNP on research and development than did Japan and West Germany.

AndrewN · Answer

In a word, yes. You understand the logic of the passage and correct answer perfectly. Since 2.19 is still less than 2.2, the U.S. would still have spent a larger percentage of its GNP on R & D than West Germany, in particular, did (ha ha... a reference to our earlier dialogue on a different question).

Cheers,
Andrew

Cheers,
Andrew

TheUltimateWinner · Answer

MentorTutoring When I wrote this explanation, I also notice the word "did" after 'than'.

So, do you think that both choice D and D1 (creative one) are legit for this CR? Appreciate your help. Thanks__

AndrewN · Answer

Yes, as long as the number for West Germany is changed to something less than 2.2, your proposed (D1) works fine. Choice (D) would remain true unless the number for Japan were changed to something greater than or equal to 2.2.

- Andrew

TheUltimateWinner · Answer

MentorTutoring 
Thank you so much for your help. 
One more question:
This one is just  draw the conclusion  question. So, what's our job here, actually? Is it our job EITHER to paraphrase whole the para that is given in the passage OR just to  draw a conclusion  that must fit WHOLE the passage (NOT just considering some facts that we like more)? 
 After changing the numeric 3.2 to 2.19: 
If we think that the correct choice is D, then we're  not   considering West Germany (here we just combine some facts that we like more!)
But, if we think the proposed D1 as the correct one, we are considering EVERYTHING that happens in the passage. 
So, here is my query again WHY we don't make such a conclusion, which definitely fits WHOLE the passage's feelings (talking about to add West German in the conclusion)?

AndrewN · Answer

I almost addressed this very concern in my last post, but I thought it might be a case of providing too much information. The question itself is not concerned with your interpretation of the whole passage, just that you draw  some  conclusion properly from the information given. We do not need to concern ourselves with both Japan and West Germany here, especially in light of the fact that the figure tied to the growth of the latter country is, in fact, greater than the one provided for the U.S. at its lower point. This sort of thing happens all the time in CR questions. Sometimes the answer comes from the conclusion, sometimes a premise or two, or sometimes the background information that might seem irrelevant at first. Just stick to what the question is asking and look to get rid of what you know goes against it. Keep your approach simple.

- Andrew

TheUltimateWinner · Answer

Thank you again for the nice help, but you confused me here.

This one is the draw the conclusion question . So, why do we need to make a conclusion from a conclusion? I did not see any official draw the conclusion questions where the correct answer option came from considering JUST ONE fact! Can you help me by giving one draw the conclusion questions where the correct choice came from just considering one fact (premise)? Your help will be appreciated for sure! Thanks__

AndrewN · Answer

No, you do not need to draw a conclusion from a conclusion. I was speaking of CR questions in general. And if you are too worried about this or any other question differing too much from an official question, feel free to skip it and practice another official question. If you poke around this forum, though, you will find plenty of different kinds of questions. Just learn what you can from them and look to apply that knowledge to other questions you may come across in the future, nothing more.

- Andrew

KarishmaB · Answer

Yes, if you want to include West Germany, its high figure should be less than 2.2.

neelugarg33 · Answer

HI  VeritasKarishma ,

How can we be very sure that the percentage spent by US during that period never went below that of Japan? Cant it be the case that it dipped below say 1 % in any year and then increased back to 2.2%?

KarishmaB · Answer

The argument tells you "... United States percentage was  steadily  decreasing..."
So the decrease was steady from 3 to 2.2, not abrupt one year and then back again next year.

lakshya14 · Answer

We don't know anything about between, we only know about 1964 and 1978?

AndrewN · Answer

Actually,  lakshya14 , we do have enough information to tell us about this in-between period. Look at the passage again, this time with highlights:

In other words, we know that the U.S. dropped from spending 3 percent of its GNP on R&D in 1964 to 2.2 percent by 1978,  and  that such spending was  steadily decreasing . Meanwhile, we are told that  during this period , Japan  increased  its percentage of R&D investment from its own GNP  to 1.6 percent . Therefore, we know that the statement in (D) is correct: the U.S.  must  have  spent a larger percentage of its GNP on research and development than did Japan . After all, 2.2 is greater than 1.6, and the correct information from the passage is being compared.

I hope that helps clarify the matter.

- Andrew

The number of patents granted to inventors by the United States Patent

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The number of patents granted to inventors by the United States Patent

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards