Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 06 Sep 2026, 12:59 |
It is currently 06 Sep 2026, 12:59 |
|
|
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.
Sep 0712:01 AM PDT
-11:59 PM PDT
On the 7th, GMAT Club Tests will be Free! Including all the Quizzes, Questions, and Tests. 12 AM - 11:59 PM PDT- Sep 07
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
A complete walkthrough of GMAT Club’s free 12-week GMAT study plan: what you study each week, how progress and goals are tracked, how the error log works, and how your practice unlocks paid tools at no cost. 
Sep 0201:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Take 30% off all study plans with code COURSEWORK - Expires on Monday 9/7
Sep 0410:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sundays Sept. 6, 2026.- Sep 09
07:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway - Sep 09
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Three MBA applications. Three rejections. No interview invites. A year later, Aman was admitted to Cambridge Judge, SMU, and IMD. In this episode of MBA Admit Stories, Aman shares how he rebuilt his MBA application... 
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2108:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
02 Jul 2025, 08:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
47% (01:56) correct
53%
(02:19)
wrong
based on 612
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
City resident: This year, the percentage of accidents caused by drivers ignoring traffic lights has fallen considerably. This means that the traffic police listened to our inquests regarding preventable traffic safety issues and took the measures needed to resolve the issues. Although accidents caused by other factors will not be eliminated, accidents that happen due to preventable traffic safety issues are certainly decreasing.
Of the following, which most clearly highlights a logical flaw in the reasoning of the city resident?
A. In reporting accidents caused due to drivers ignoring traffic light, the traffic police sometimes incorrectly attribute the accidents to a cause other than drivers ignoring traffic lights.
B. Accidents caused by factors other than drivers ignoring traffic lights could have risen sharply in number during the relevant year.
C. It is possible that inquests made with the traffic police are not the most reliable way to ascertain how many accidents took place in a particular year.
D. The accidents caused by other factors may have increased the number of inquests made with the traffic police.
E. In some accidents caused due to drivers ignoring traffic light, city residents many not believe that drivers ignoring traffic lights was the cause of the accidents.
Of the following, which most clearly highlights a logical flaw in the reasoning of the city resident?
A. In reporting accidents caused due to drivers ignoring traffic light, the traffic police sometimes incorrectly attribute the accidents to a cause other than drivers ignoring traffic lights.
B. Accidents caused by factors other than drivers ignoring traffic lights could have risen sharply in number during the relevant year.
C. It is possible that inquests made with the traffic police are not the most reliable way to ascertain how many accidents took place in a particular year.
D. The accidents caused by other factors may have increased the number of inquests made with the traffic police.
E. In some accidents caused due to drivers ignoring traffic light, city residents many not believe that drivers ignoring traffic lights was the cause of the accidents.
|
02 Jul 2025, 08:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
Experts' Global Explanation:
Mind-map: Percentage of accidents caused by drivers ignoring traffic lights declined this year à resident inquests regarding preventable traffic safety issues are addressed by traffic police à accidents caused by other factors will remain à accidents that happen due to preventable traffic safety issues are decreasing (conclusion)
Missing-link: Between percentage of accidents caused by drivers ignoring traffic lights declining this year and the conclusion that accidents that happen due to preventable traffic safety issues are decreasing
Expectation from the correct answer choice: Something on the lines of confusing the decline in the “percentage” of accidents of a particular type, among all accidents, with the decline in the “number” of the accidents of that type
Note: This argument commits the classic GMAT error of confusing “percentage" with "absolute numbers”; the city resident cites the decline in the “percentage” of accidents of a particular type, among all accidents, but draws a conclusion about the decline in the “number” of the accidents of that type. Besides, please be extra careful when you see numbers/percentages/proportions in CR questions; often, the key lies in the numbers.
A. Trap. This answer choice, suggesting that some accidents are likely not correctly attributed to drivers ignoring traffic lights, indicates underreporting of such accidents; this answer choice makes no suggestion regarding a specific timeline, suggesting that this answer choice indicates underreporting at all times in the past; so, underreporting is a common factor in the past years and in this year, thus failing to explain any difference in the proportion/number of such accidents in this year; hence, this answer choice is just additional information and does not weaken the argument. Furthermore, the flaw in the argument is that it confuses the decline in the “percentage” of accidents of a particular type, among all accidents, with the decline in the “number” of the accidents of that type; we need an answer choice on similar lines. Because this answer choice does not indicate the flaw in the argument, this answer choice is incorrect.
B. Correct. If there is a sharp rise in the number of accidents because of factors other than drivers ignoring traffic lights, the number of all accidents is likely to rise significantly; a large increase in the total number of accidents indicates that even if the percentage of accidents of a particular type declined, it does not necessarily indicate a decline in the number of such accidents (example: 10% of 100 is greater than 8% of 150); so, the possibility stated in this answer choice casts doubt on the conclusion that accidents that happen due to preventable traffic safety issues are decreasing; hence, failure to consider the sharp rise in the accidents caused by other factors is the flaw in the argument, as the answer choice mentions. Because this answer choice indicates the flaw in the argument, this answer choice is correct.
C. Trap. The argument is concerned with whether the accidents that happen due to preventable traffic safety issues are decreasing; the city resident cites inquests as the cause for this decline and not as a measure of the number of accidents; whether inquests are the most reliable way to ascertain the number of accidents has no bearing on the argument; so, failure to consider the possibility stated in this answer choice is not the flaw in the argument. Furthermore, the flaw in the argument is that it confuses the decline in the “percentage” of accidents of a particular type, among all accidents, with the decline in the “number” of the accidents of that type; we need an answer choice on similar lines. Because this answer choice does not indicate the flaw in the argument, this answer choice is incorrect.
D. Trap. The argument is concerned with whether the accidents that happen due to preventable traffic safety issues are decreasing; the city resident cites inquests as the cause for this decline; whether the number of inquests increased and what the cause for the increase was have no bearing on the argument; so, failure to consider the possibility stated in the answer choice is not the flaw in the argument. Furthermore, the flaw in the argument is that it confuses the decline in the “percentage” of accidents of a particular type, among all accidents, with the decline in the “number” of accidents of that type; we need an answer choice on similar lines. Because this answer choice does not indicate the flaw in the argument, this answer choice is incorrect.
E. Trap. What the city residents believe regarding particular accidents and their causes makes no suggestion regarding whether the accidents that happen due to preventable traffic safety issues are decreasing; so, this answer choice is just additional information and does not weaken the argument; hence, failure to consider the possibility stated in the answer choice is not the flaw in the argument. Furthermore, the flaw in the argument is that it confuses the decline in the “percentage” of accidents of a particular type, among all accidents, with the decline in the “number” of the accidents of that type; we need an answer choice on similar lines. Because this answer choice does not indicate the flaw in the argument, this answer choice is incorrect.
B is the best choice.
General Discussion
MaxFabianKirchner
Joined: 02 Jun 2025
Last visit: 12 Jul 2025
Posts: 65
Given Kudos: 122
Status:26' Applicant
Location: Denmark
Concentration: Finance, International Business
Schools: ESSEC MiF '26 ESADE HEC Imperial LBS Oxford MFE '26 Sloan (MIT) NYU Stern NUS Bocconi IE'26
GPA: 4.0
WE:Other (Student)
Schools: ESSEC MiF '26 ESADE HEC Imperial LBS Oxford MFE '26 Sloan (MIT) NYU Stern NUS Bocconi IE'26
Posts: 65
02 Jul 2025, 08:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
The resident's reasoning is flawed because a decrease in the percentage of one type of accident does not necessarily mean the number of those accidents has decreased. The percentage could have dropped simply because the total number of all accidents increased dramatically.
Option (B) highlights this flaw perfectly. If accidents from other causes rose sharply, the total number of accidents would be much higher. This would make the percentage of light-ignoring accidents smaller, even if their actual number stayed the same or increased. This shows why the resident's conclusion is not logically sound.
The correct answer is (B).
Option (B) highlights this flaw perfectly. If accidents from other causes rose sharply, the total number of accidents would be much higher. This would make the percentage of light-ignoring accidents smaller, even if their actual number stayed the same or increased. This shows why the resident's conclusion is not logically sound.
The correct answer is (B).
Heix
Joined: 21 Feb 2024
Last visit: 13 Jul 2026
Posts: 495
Given Kudos: 63
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Ross MM "26 NUS Columbia '27
GMAT Focus 1: 485 Q76 V74 DI77 
GPA: 3.4
WE:Accounting (Finance)
Products:
02 Jul 2025, 08:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
Option A: This says police might be incorrectly reporting some accidents, not counting them as "ignoring traffic lights" when they actually were. This doesn't address the main flaw in the argument, which is jumping from "percentage decrease" to "police took effective action."
Option B: This is the correct answer. It points out that if other types of accidents increased significantly, the percentage of traffic light accidents would naturally decrease, even if the
actual number stayed the same. This breaks the resident's logic that "decreased percentage = police took effective action."
Option C: This says inquests aren't reliable for counting accidents. But the resident doesn't claim inquests were used to count accidents - they were used to request action from police.
Option D: This suggests other accidents might have caused more inquests. This doesn't address the flaw in the resident's reasoning about the decrease in traffic light accidents.
Option E: This says residents might disagree about what caused some accidents. This doesn't highlight the main problem with the resident's conclusion that police action led to fewer preventable accidents.
Option B: This is the correct answer. It points out that if other types of accidents increased significantly, the percentage of traffic light accidents would naturally decrease, even if the
actual number stayed the same. This breaks the resident's logic that "decreased percentage = police took effective action."
Option C: This says inquests aren't reliable for counting accidents. But the resident doesn't claim inquests were used to count accidents - they were used to request action from police.
Option D: This suggests other accidents might have caused more inquests. This doesn't address the flaw in the resident's reasoning about the decrease in traffic light accidents.
Option E: This says residents might disagree about what caused some accidents. This doesn't highlight the main problem with the resident's conclusion that police action led to fewer preventable accidents.
