GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 19 Jan 2020, 12:50

### 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

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

# How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 60496
How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2017, 01:11
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

51% (01:44) correct 49% (01:42) wrong based on 82 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5% between 1940 and 1972?

(A) 0
(B) 1
(C) 2
(D) 3
(E) 4

_________________
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Posts: 3734
How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2017, 15:03
1
Bunuel wrote:

How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5% between 1940 and 1972?

(A) 0
(B) 1
(C) 2
(D) 3
(E) 4

Stacked column charts are hard. Each vertical bar typically, as here, contains numbers that must be calculated by chopping the bar into segments and subtracting height values to get amounts.

Despite my familiarity with graphs, and despite believing that the answer was "zero," I was not certain. These numbers can be hard to eyeball.

All numbers discussed are in millions.

So I solved by:
1) finding the population number in 1940
2) calculating what would = 5 percent growth, and
3) without being exact, seeing whether or not the 1972 figure was greater than my calculated growth figure.

If so, growth was greater than 5 percent.

The numbers as I measured them:

NORTHEAST
1940 = 40. Add 5 percent, = 42. 1972 figure (difference between top and bottom lines of solid dark gray part) is greater than 42

NORTH CENTRAL
1940 = 30. Add 5 percent = 31.5. 1972 figure (difference between top and bottom lines of cross-hatched gray part) is greater than 31.5

SOUTH
1940 = 40. Same as Northeast. 1972 figure (difference between top and bottom lines of light gray part) is greater than 42

WEST
1940 = 20. Add 5 percent = 21. 1972 figure (difference between top and bottom lines of solid white part) is greater than 21

Peanut gallery: you do not have to look at the chart.

I have experience with graphs.
In case reading this kind of graph is not familiar, I have attached the way I measured each region.
I would not replicate this detail on test day.
But you do have to be able to ballpark it. These annotations show how to calculate fairly accurate figures.
Finding the numbers on the annotated graph took me about 2.5 minutes. The method I used to answer the question took one minute.

Notice that the top of one region constitutes the bottom of another. Beginning numbers in the same color as previous region indicate as much.
Finally, circled numbers are totals from 1940 and 1972; they are what need to be compared.

To measure growth:
1) find 1940 lower end value, from where the line on the bottom of the segment that corresponds with the region "hits" on the left side of graph (e.g. North Central is hatched crosswise)
2) subtract from 1940 higher end value, found by seeing where the top line from that segment hits on the left side of graph - that is the 1940 population number
3) do the same for 1972 - that is the 1972 population number
4) divide 1972 by 1940 - you will get a 1.xx figure. The .xx is the percentage growth in decimal form

How the numbers fell out as I read them:

NORTHEAST:
1940 = 40
1972 = 50
50/40 = 1.25 = 25 percent growth

NORTH CENTRAL
1940 = 30
1972 = 55
55/30 = 1.83 = 83 percent growth

SOUTH
1940 = 40
1972 = 70
70/40 = 1.75 = 75 percent growth

WEST
1940 = 20
1972 = 30
30/20 = 1.5 = 50 percent growth

None of the regions experienced less than 5 percent growth - Answer A
Attachment:

popchart.png [ 74.39 KiB | Viewed 1209 times ]

_________________
SC Butler has resumed! Get two SC questions to practice, whose links you can find by date, here.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has -- Margaret Mead
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 07 Nov 2016
Posts: 54
GMAT 1: 760 Q51 V42
Re: How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jan 2019, 04:21
Bunuel wrote:

How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5% between 1940 and 1972?

(A) 0
(B) 1
(C) 2
(D) 3
(E) 4

By Visual inspection it can be seen that the only region for which there is any doubt that population increase may be less than 5%

between 1940 and 1972 is Northeast.Only that needs to be checked

Choice A
_________________
Director
Joined: 09 Aug 2017
Posts: 675
Re: How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Dec 2019, 21:23
I have a question.

Are we comparing population in 1940 and in 1972 or all years between 1940 and 1972?
If we are considering all years between 1940 and 1972, northeast and northcentral might be regions maintaining population increase less then 5%.

Am I correct?

ksrutisagar wrote:
Bunuel wrote:

How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5% between 1940 and 1972?

(A) 0
(B) 1
(C) 2
(D) 3
(E) 4

By Visual inspection it can be seen that the only region for which there is any doubt that population increase may be less than 5%

between 1940 and 1972 is Northeast.Only that needs to be checked

Choice A
Re: How many of the regions shown had a population increase of less than 5   [#permalink] 07 Dec 2019, 21:23
Display posts from previous: Sort by