GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 21 Aug 2018, 03:22

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

During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite

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

Hide Tags

SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 1699
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 28 Jan 2018, 01:07
1
4
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

65% (01:16) correct 35% (01:22) wrong based on 842 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The Official Guide for GMAT Review, 10th Edition, 2003

Practice Question
Question No.: CR 16
Page: 502

During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis of those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.

Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United States in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas

(B) Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths

(C) Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries

(D) Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths

(E) Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces

Originally posted by jaynayak on 17 Jun 2006, 11:36.
Last edited by hazelnut on 28 Jan 2018, 01:07, edited 1 time in total.
Edited the question.
Most Helpful Community Reply
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 31 Mar 2014
Posts: 18
Concentration: Operations, General Management
Schools: IIMA (PGPX)
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Aug 2014, 09:00
1
uring the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis of those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.
Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?
Conclusion: It was not much dangerous to be overseas in army than it was to stay at home.
How he arrived at conclusion : Comparing deaths. (assuming that : Total population of united states is same as number of people serving overseas in army) .
Weaken : We can weaken this by saying that percentage is deaths is way lesser among civilians than it is among armed forces.
KEY: averages, percentage increases, proportion questions you can't simply compare numerators. Death rate=(No.of.deaths in a target group)/ (total number of people) .


(A) Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United States in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas
This completely ignores civilians. ofs
(B) Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths
This would have been correct answer if it had not have the word "difference" . % is the way to compare but not the difference in percentage.
(C) Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries
source of death is out of scope
(D) Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths
This is correct comparision. For every 1000 civilians how many have died. Compare it with how many have died serving in army overseas
(E) Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces.
Again talking about only one side of the comparison that is about army.
General Discussion
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 06 May 2006
Posts: 772
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2006, 12:35
D.

a) we are talking overseas armed forces here.
b) not much of a difference from existing stats
c) does not help
d) :idea:
e) accidents vs combat ?! nopes
_________________

Uh uh. I know what you're thinking. "Is the answer A, B, C, D or E?" Well to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 1369
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2006, 12:41
1
I agree with D is very sure it is likely to be correct

(A) nobody adds those deaths... the argument is about how likely it is to die overseas or in the US... not armed forces in US though
(B) nothing said about the difference
(C) out of scope... reasons are irrelevant
(D) the total number of civilians is far greater than the number of armed forces overseas, therefore comparing deaths is useless if you don't not the total for each group
(E) again, out of score... reasons are not the case of the argument.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Posts: 134
Reviews Badge
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jun 2011, 03:19
1
4
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.

Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas

(B) Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths

(C) Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries

(D) Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths

(E) Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces

Can somebody explain the D in detail. I am not getting how we are getting higher death rates for smaller groups?
"D exposes this absurdity by pointing out the need to compare death rates of the two groups, which would reveal the higher death rate for the smaller group."
Current Student
avatar
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 526
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jun 2011, 03:25
1
udaymathapati wrote:
16. During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members
of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was
not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay
at home as a civilian.
Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?
A. Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths
among members of the armed forces serving overseas
B. Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed
forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths
C. Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat
injuries
D. Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths
E. Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed
forces

Can somebody explain the D in detail. I am not getting how we are getting higher death rates for smaller groups?
"D exposes this absurdity by pointing out the need to compare death rates of the two groups, which would reveal the higher death rate for the smaller group."


Clean D

Supposre the population of civilians is US is 3 Million
out these 375,000 died = ~19%

and armed forces population is 8,00,000
out of these 4,08,000 dies = 51%
so the conclusion "it was
not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay
at home as a civilian." fails

hope this clears
VP
VP
avatar
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1124
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jun 2011, 03:45
2
1
Consider two groups A and B.
In A 5 members have died and in B 8 members have died.
Now its obvious to say group is safer.

However, in group A there were 10 people. rate = 5/10 = 50%
in group B there were 100 people rate = 8/100 = 0.8%.

Thus B is much safer.

Similarly, if we compare per 1000 people the rates will be known.
This is the logic used in D.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 11 Oct 2010
Posts: 10
Reviews Badge
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jul 2011, 19:11
B is much clearer indicator of deaths
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 1699
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Aug 2014, 09:00
This topic have been merged with: http://gmatclub.com/forum/topic-115185.html
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 187
Location: United States
Schools: Duke '20 (D)
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V27
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.2
Reviews Badge
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Dec 2015, 11:45
Confused between D and B..

B sounds ok to me.. can anyone explain why D is better?
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 06 Jun 2013
Posts: 175
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Tuck
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.6
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Premium Member
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jul 2016, 02:13
1
D is better and more accurate than B.
if there are 60 civilian deaths in a population of 10,000 and 40 armed forces deaths in a battalion of 100 army men, then according to B 60% deaths will be from civilian population n 40% deaths will be from military.

whereas if we consider D, death percentage will be ( 60/10000) *100 = 0.6 % for civilian and (40/100)*100 = 40% for armed forces.

so serving army is more dangerous
Director
Director
User avatar
S
Joined: 08 Jun 2015
Posts: 528
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 700 Q48 V38
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jul 2018, 23:26
+1 for option D. This is essentially a "flaw type" question. The flaw in the reasoning is that the argument only compares numbers ; it should be comparing figures per thousands. Option D clearly states this !
_________________

" The few , the fearless "

Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite &nbs [#permalink] 28 Jul 2018, 23:26
Display posts from previous: Sort by

During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite

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

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| 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®.