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 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
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.
08 Jul 2024, 10:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
Economist: A recent survey found that in countries with higher rates of internet censorship, there are also higher rates of internet usage per capita. This seems counterintuitive because one might expect that restrictions on internet content would deter usage.
Which of the following, if true and known by the residents of these countries, would best help explain the paradoxical results of the survey?
Well here we need to explain the paradox.
Paradox - although the censorship levels are high internet usage per capita is high. We need to pay attention to the per capita as it means (internet usage/total people)
Moving to option analysis now
(A) Many residents in countries with higher internet censorship use the internet primarily for work-related purposes, which are not affected by censorship policies.
Well, that does not really explain why per capita usage is high.
(B) Residents in countries with high internet censorship often use proxy servers and VPNs, which allow them to bypass restrictions and access a broader range of content online.
Broader range of content online does not prove or explain why there is higher usage per capita. Technically, the VPNs and proxy servers should deter the masses and hence the usage should be lower
(C) There is an observed trend in the data collection methodology where internet usage metrics might include both direct and indirect engagement metrics, which vary significantly between surveyed regions.
In that case, the usage should come out more than what is expected. But, this still does not explain why the usage is abysmally high inspite of the hinderances established by the government
(D) Countries with high rates of internet censorship often have higher populations, thus naturally leading to a higher total number of internet users.
Higher population might lead to a higher total number but we should not forget that the question asks the per capita usage. Hence, if we divide the usage/population then this number should come out to be low. Therefore, this does not help
(E) The survey included responses from a disproportionate number of young people, who tend to use the internet more frequently regardless of censorship levels.
This sounds good. If a number of youngsters are using some new advanced techniques to bypass the government restrictions and if they are disproportionately being considered in the survey then they could lead the per capita usage to be tilted towards high. This is our answer.
Which of the following, if true and known by the residents of these countries, would best help explain the paradoxical results of the survey?
Well here we need to explain the paradox.
Paradox - although the censorship levels are high internet usage per capita is high. We need to pay attention to the per capita as it means (internet usage/total people)
Moving to option analysis now
(A) Many residents in countries with higher internet censorship use the internet primarily for work-related purposes, which are not affected by censorship policies.
Well, that does not really explain why per capita usage is high.
(B) Residents in countries with high internet censorship often use proxy servers and VPNs, which allow them to bypass restrictions and access a broader range of content online.
Broader range of content online does not prove or explain why there is higher usage per capita. Technically, the VPNs and proxy servers should deter the masses and hence the usage should be lower
(C) There is an observed trend in the data collection methodology where internet usage metrics might include both direct and indirect engagement metrics, which vary significantly between surveyed regions.
In that case, the usage should come out more than what is expected. But, this still does not explain why the usage is abysmally high inspite of the hinderances established by the government
(D) Countries with high rates of internet censorship often have higher populations, thus naturally leading to a higher total number of internet users.
Higher population might lead to a higher total number but we should not forget that the question asks the per capita usage. Hence, if we divide the usage/population then this number should come out to be low. Therefore, this does not help
(E) The survey included responses from a disproportionate number of young people, who tend to use the internet more frequently regardless of censorship levels.
This sounds good. If a number of youngsters are using some new advanced techniques to bypass the government restrictions and if they are disproportionately being considered in the survey then they could lead the per capita usage to be tilted towards high. This is our answer.
08 Jul 2024, 10:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
Paradox - Higher rates of internet usage per capita in certain countries despite higher rates of internet censorship in such countries
A - Cool. But do we know whether the internet usage for such work related purposes contribute more to the rate of internet usage per capita. This option is not sufficient to explain the paradox.
B- We do not know whether the people using proxy server and VPNs form a large portion of internet users and thereby contribute to the trend observed. How often they do so also matters.
C - Trend in data collection methodology and variation in direct/indirect engagement metrics across surveyed regions is irrelevant.
D - The observed trend is based on internet usage per capita. Therefore, the higher number of population does not really affect our argument.
E - Correct. The survey is biased as in the trend would be observed regardless of whether there was higher/lower rates of internet censorship. This explains our paradox.
A - Cool. But do we know whether the internet usage for such work related purposes contribute more to the rate of internet usage per capita. This option is not sufficient to explain the paradox.
B- We do not know whether the people using proxy server and VPNs form a large portion of internet users and thereby contribute to the trend observed. How often they do so also matters.
C - Trend in data collection methodology and variation in direct/indirect engagement metrics across surveyed regions is irrelevant.
D - The observed trend is based on internet usage per capita. Therefore, the higher number of population does not really affect our argument.
E - Correct. The survey is biased as in the trend would be observed regardless of whether there was higher/lower rates of internet censorship. This explains our paradox.
