?> In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver : Critical Reasoning (CR)
GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 19 Sep 2018, 04:09

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

In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver

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

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2008
Posts: 94
Schools: Tuck, Duke
In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 06 Sep 2018, 03:50
3
21
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  65% (hard)

Question Stats:

55% (01:06) correct 45% (01:17) wrong based on 1602 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Verland used wooden sleds with runners and steering bars. Ten years ago, smooth plastic sleds became popular; they go faster than wooden sleds but are harder to steer and slow. The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago.

Which of the following, if true in Verland, most seriously undermines the force of the evidence cited?


(A) A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.

(B) Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.

(C) Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.

(D) Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.

(E) Because the traditional wooden sled can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.


Verbal Question of The Day: Day 192: Critical Reasoning


Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS
For All QOTD Questions Click Here

Originally posted by arorag on 21 Sep 2008, 14:26.
Last edited by Bunuel on 06 Sep 2018, 03:50, edited 3 times in total.
Edited the question.
Most Helpful Expert Reply
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2003
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jan 2018, 04:10
1
2
Since we are looking for an answer choice that most undermines the force of the evidence cited, let's start by identifying that evidence: "the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago."

According to the author, this evidence "clearly" leads to the concern that plastic sleds, which became more popular ten years ago, are more dangerous than wooden sleds. To recap the author's argument:

  • Wooden sleds, with runners and steering bars, were used in the past.
  • Ten years ago, plastic sleds became popular.
  • Plastic sleds are faster, harder to steer, and harder to slow down.
  • "The number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago." Remember that ten years ago plastic sleds had just become popular, so it is likely that wooden sleds were still prevalent as well (it's possible to have more than one popular option). But we can infer that plastic sleds are probably more popular now than they were ten years ago.
  • The evidence in the last bullet clearly leads to the concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds.

Now let's look for the answer choice that most undermines the force of the evidence cited:

Quote:
A. A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.

Again, the evidence cited is "that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago." This evidence seems to suggest that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds. Even if a few children still use traditional wooden sleds, if injuries have increased since plastic sleds became popular, this still seems to suggest that plastic sleds are more dangerous.

The evidence cited does not require that ALL children use plastic sleds, so (A) can be eliminated.

Quote:
B. Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.

This statement might explain why sledding is dangerous regardless of the type of sled. However, it doesn't give us any reason to suspect that plastic sleds are safer than wooden sleds or vice versa. Thus, choice (B) has no impact on the evidence cited and can be eliminated.

Quote:
C. Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.

Imagine that plastic sleds and wooden sleds were both equally safe. But if plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions, then children last winter might have simply gone sledding more times, on average, than children ten years ago. In other words, the odds of getting injured while riding a plastic sled could be the same as the odds of getting injured while riding a wooden sled. But if you can go sledding more times with a plastic sled, then you will have more opportunities to injure yourself.

Answer choice (C) provides an alternative explanation for the evidence, and this explanation does not require that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds. So (C) undermines the force of the evidence cited. Keep this one.

Quote:
D. Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.

As with choice (B), this is a general statement that presumably applies to sledding with both wooden and plastic sleds. It has no bearing on the evidence and can be eliminated.

Quote:
E. Because the traditional wooden sled can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.

We are GIVEN the fact that "the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago." Maybe there are more injuries per accident with wooden sleds, but this does not change the fact that, overall, there were more injuries last winter than there were when wooden sleds were more prevalent. We are not trying to change the evidence; rather, we are trying to undermine the force of the evidence. Choice (E) has no impact on the evidence and can be eliminated.

Choice (C) is the best answer.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

Most Helpful Community Reply
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 583
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 13 Jun 2016, 11:08
10
3
Answer is C

EXPLAINATION:-
In weaken questions one must try to attack the conclusion of the argument. Because there is a logical error in the conclusion and by revealing the error, you can show that the conclusion is weak. A weak conclusion makes the entire argument invalid (if the argument is deductive) or uncogent (if the argument is inductive). Also remember in Weaken question, we can use New Information.

Lets try to do this here
The argument tells us that Plastic sleds have these qualities:- faster, bad handling (hard to steer), weak brakes (harder to slow).
"Plastic sleds became popular; they go faster than wooden sleds but are harder to steer and slow" ===> mentioned in passage
Now if something skids fast, cannot be stopped and cannot be handled, it will crash more frequently and more injuries will occur.

The argument also tells us that Plastic Sleds have been used for 10 years but the rate of accident was higher only last year.
Ten years ago, smooth plastic sleds became popular ===> mentioned in passage
The number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago. ===> mentioned in passage
Suddenly during last year the accident number has gone up? Why ? LET US INVESTIGATE.

A. A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.
This should actually cause less accident, since wooden sleds are safer. DISCARD OPTION A

B. Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.
Well, children must not be wearing protection for 10 years. Why accidents have gone up last year only. doesn't answer this question. DISCARD OPTION B

C. Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
At first glance looks out of scope or irrelevant...BUT KEEP IT FOR LATER ANALYSIS

D. Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.
So suddenly last year many trees, many rocks and many sleds appear? No indication about that DISCARD OPTION D

E. Because the traditional wooden sled can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.
This is reverse answer. More Wooden Sled = More injuries. So accidents should have been more 10 years ago when wooden sleds were used, not now. DISCARD OPTION E

What remains with us now is only option C which looked out of scope, or irrelevant
Now no matter, whether we like it or not it has to be the answer.

Lets Analyse it again
C. Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.

Wooden sled can only be used in good weather when snow is soft and fresh, when there is no storm, when there is no fog, when visibility is good etc etc. Also given they are safer.

Plastic sled can be used in much wider condition such as when there is snow storm, still snowing, when the snow is hard and can cause injury on impact etc etc.

So may be last year something happened that has not happened in a long time after the introduction of plastic sleds. Finally after 10 years, last year snow conditions were bad. Now if people used wooden sleds , they could not sled because their wooden sleds don't have the capability. So NO sleds = NO accidents.
But Plastic sleds can still sleds in such extreme conditions. So people being stupid, ignored the bad condition and went out and coupled with the fact that plastic sleds are injury prone, People got injured and injured again and injured again. Stupid People :)

AND WHY DOES THIS HAPPENED:- THE BLAME LIES ON PLASTIC SLEDS BECAUSE THEY CAN WORK IN A VARIETY OF WEATHER CONDITIONS (INCLUDING BAD CONDITIONS)

Thats what exactly option C says

CORRECT ANSWER C





In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Verland used wooden sleds with runners and steering bars. Ten years ago, smooth plastic sleds became popular; they go faster than wooden sleds but are harder to steer and slow. The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago.

Which of the following, if true in Verland, most seriously undermines the force of the evidence cited?
A. A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.
B. Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.
C. Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
D. Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.
E. Because the traditional wooden sled can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.
_________________

Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.


Originally posted by LogicGuru1 on 11 Jun 2016, 00:13.
Last edited by LogicGuru1 on 13 Jun 2016, 11:08, edited 1 time in total.
General Discussion
Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 341
Location: San Francisco
In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Feb 2010, 19:32
2
1
Hey All,

The one thing I try to avoid when reviewing is writing off too many answer choices as "no effect" or "out of scope". This tends to ignore the subtlety of certain answer choices, and leads one to an attitude of ALL or NOTHING in terms of answer choices. Dangerous.

Conclusion: Plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds.

Premises: In past 10 years, plastic sleds have become more popular than wooden. More children injured on sleds now than 10 years ago.

Already, you should be able to see the assumption. We jumped to danger, without considering any other factors

Assumption: Some other factor is responsible for the jump in injuries (more people using sled, for example).


(A) A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.
PROBLEM: This doesn't weaken the argument. In fact, this is the argument. The whole idea is that lots of people are using plastic sleds, which are dangerous. A few children doesn't change that.

(B) Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.
PROBLEM: This doesn't compare wooden sleds to plastic sleds, so doesn't explain why one might be more dangerous.

(C) Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
ANSWER: Now the plastic sled can get used a lot more often. This would explain why there are so many more injuries, because there's a lot more sledding going on. The argument that plastic sleds are more dangerous is now unlikely.

(D) Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.
PROBLEM: Like B, this doesn't differentiate between wooden and plastic sleds.

(E) Because the traditional wooden sleds can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.
PROBLEM: We want to weaken the argument that plastic sleds are dangerous. Making wooden sleds hurt more people doesn't actually affect that. If anything, this strengthens the argument. If multiple people could get wounded on one wooden sled, then why would the #s be EVEN HIGHER for injuries on a plastic sled?

Hope that helps!
_________________


Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 86
Location: India
GMAT Date: 10-25-2012
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Oct 2012, 07:23
4
1
The argument concludes that The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago.

If we read the question stem closely, it asks which option undermines the force of evidence, that is which option attacks the reason provided in the argument for increase in injuries while using plastic sled. option C clearly provides an alternative reason.

OA to this question is C only :) I have checked in other threads as well.
_________________

if my post helped you, let me know by pressing Kudos...

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 548
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Finance
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Nov 2012, 06:41
2
The argument is attributing increase in number of accidents to steel.

Consider:
15yrs ago: 10 steel users with 2 accidents per user - 20 accidents
Now: 100 steel users with 2 accidents per user - 200 accidents

Although 200 accidents now from steel, we still cannot conclude steel are more dangerous
than wood.
_________________

KUDOS me if you feel my contribution has helped you.

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 84
Schools: Haas '16, AGSM '16
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Mar 2015, 18:51
1
4
Explanation for choice C

Conclusion: the number of children injured while sledding was much higher than it was ten years ago => plastic sleds more dangerous.

Assumption: the number of children who involve in accidences is representative for each sleds. In other words, the number of time that children use plastic sleds is comparable to that of children using wooden sleds

Weaken: the assumption. hence choice C is correct
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
Posts: 874
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.98
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jan 2016, 07:31
2
I chose 'C' over 'D'.

The reason for this was that 'owning' a sled does not mean that children are actually 'sledding'. It is possible that they are just owning it but not using it.

However, option 'C' says that safety precautions are not used and that might have resulted in more injuries.

Any thoughts, folks??
_________________

I welcome critical analysis of my post!! That will help me reach 700+

Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 795
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jan 2016, 08:26
1
1
Choice D is the correct answer because you want to find some information that weakens the argument. It's a classic GMAT-like argument that attempts to compare raw numbers when rates really should be compared. This issue is highlighted by choice D which states that the number of sleds (and by extension sledders) has grown significantly with the introduction of the cheaper plastic sled. This increase in sleds could lead to a higher NUMBER of accidents with a lower RATE of accidents overall, thus weakening the conclusion.

You have a valid point about the sleds not necessarily equating directly with sledders, but remember that with CR you are choosing the best answer available. Choice C doesn't provide any differentiation between now and 15 years ago. If it had (by mentioning that protective gear was used heavily 15 years ago but not anymore) then C would be a strong answer choice.

KW
_________________


Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile



Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Nov 2011
Posts: 107
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2016, 00:50
KyleWiddison wrote:
Choice D is the correct answer because you want to find some information that weakens the argument. It's a classic GMAT-like argument that attempts to compare raw numbers when rates really should be compared. This issue is highlighted by choice D which states that the number of sleds (and by extension sledders) has grown significantly with the introduction of the cheaper plastic sled. This increase in sleds could lead to a higher NUMBER of accidents with a lower RATE of accidents overall, thus weakening the conclusion.

You have a valid point about the sleds not necessarily equating directly with sledders, but remember that with CR you are choosing the best answer available. Choice C doesn't provide any differentiation between now and 15 years ago. If it had (by mentioning that protective gear was used heavily 15 years ago but not anymore) then C would be a strong answer choice.

KW



KyleWiddison I know E cannnot be the answer because it gives no information about Plastics sleds, but what if E had (by mentioning that today Plastics sleds carry 4 riders and traditional wooden carry 2 riders), would this be the possible contender.
My reasoning to this is "number of injuries more not because number of acc but because carry more slders". PLease share your thoughts on this.
Manhattan Prep Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 795
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Mar 2016, 07:37
1
The real issue with E isn't so much that is doesn't compare wooden vs. plastic sleds but rather the issue is the unnecessary information on injuries per crash. Look at the wording of the argument. We are comparing the gross number of injuries attributed to plastic or wooden sleds, not injuries per sled. Whether a sled carries 1 or 100 riders is irrelevant because the data sums all the injuries related to sledding. If the argument had discussed injuries per crash and E discussed the comparison between wood and plastic then E would be in contention.

KW
_________________


Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah


Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile



Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Status: Come! Fall in Love with Learning!
Joined: 05 Jan 2017
Posts: 451
Location: India
Premium Member
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Mar 2017, 03:52
(A) A few children still use traditional wooden sleds. ( Wrong Answer : The argument is about an increase the sled related injuries.)

(B) Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding. ( Wrong : this is not affecting the argument in any manner.)

(C) Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can. (Right Answer : Given the fact that plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions the chances of injury gets increased alongwith the variety.)

(D) Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled. ( wrong Answer : This is not affecting the argument since this may happen to both plastic as well as wooden sled riders)

(E) Because the traditional wooden sleds can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.( wrong Answer : the argument’s focus is plastic sleds)
_________________

GMAT Mentors
Image

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 22 Aug 2016
Posts: 86
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Finance
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Other (Education)
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Aug 2017, 20:15
Hi
No reply talks about A and I am wondered.

A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.

I chose A because if the number of people using plastic is more or wood is less, that explains the discrepancy in the evidence.
Could you help me understand where I am going wrong?
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2003
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Aug 2017, 15:23
1
sarathgopinath wrote:
Hi
No reply talks about A and I am wondered.

A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.

I chose A because if the number of people using plastic is more or wood is less, that explains the discrepancy in the evidence.
Could you help me understand where I am going wrong?

Quote:
A. A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.

The evidence cited is "that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago [when wooden sleds were popular]." This evidence seems to suggest that plastic sleds are more dangerous. Even if a few children still use traditional wooden sleds, if injuries have increased since plastic sleds became popular, this still suggests that plastic sleds are more dangerous.

The evidence cited does not require that ALL children use plastic sleds, so (A) can be eliminated.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

CEO
CEO
User avatar
D
Joined: 12 Sep 2015
Posts: 2848
Location: Canada
In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 06 Sep 2018, 13:02
Top Contributor
arorag wrote:
In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Verland used wooden sleds with runners and steering bars. Ten years ago, smooth plastic sleds became popular; they go faster than wooden sleds but are harder to steer and slow. The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was ten years ago.

Which of the following, if true in Verland, most seriously undermines the force of the evidence cited?
A. A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.
B. Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.
C. Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
D. Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.
E. Because the traditional wooden sled can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.


PREMISE: In the past children used wooden sleds
PREMISE: 10 years ago plastic sleds became popular
PREMISE: Plastic sleds are faster and harder to control
PREMISE: More children injured sledding last year than 10 years ago
CONCLUSION: Plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds

Let's check the answer choices While also reminding ourselves what the conclusion is...

A) This does not weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous. ELIMINATE
B) This does not weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous. ELIMINATE
C) If plastic sleds can be used in more situations, then children will go sledding a lot more often. The more children go sledding the more likely they are to injure themselves. So it's quite possible that the increase in injuries is not due to the plastic sleds themselves but rather the fact that children are able to go sledding more. This weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds.
D) This does not weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds. ELIMINATE
E) This does not weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds. ELIMINATE

Answer: C

Cheers,
Brent
_________________

Brent Hanneson – GMATPrepNow.com
Image
Sign up for our free Question of the Day emails


Originally posted by GMATPrepNow on 20 Nov 2017, 13:51.
Last edited by GMATPrepNow on 06 Sep 2018, 13:02, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 03 May 2014
Posts: 31
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jan 2018, 08:52
1
This one is classic GMAT number/proportion problem.
C is the answer - Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
Example:
10 years ago (Wooden sleds) -
Only wooden sleds, Sled population 1000, Accidents 100. - Overall percentage 10%.
Now (Plastic sleds) -
Plastic sleds population: 10,000 (population is more because plastic sleds can be used in variety of snow conditions), Accidents/injures - 500. Overall percentage - 5%.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
D
Joined: 12 Sep 2015
Posts: 2848
Location: Canada
Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2018, 09:42
Top Contributor
kimmyg wrote:
In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Verland used wooden sleds with runners and steering bars. Ten years ago, smooth plastic sleds became popular; they go faster than wooden sleds but are harder to steer and slow. The concern that plastic sleds are more dangerous is clearly borne out by the fact that the number of children injured while sledding was much higher last winter than it was 10 years ago.

Which of the following, if true in Verland, most seriously undermines the force of the evidence cited?

(A) A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.
(B) Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.
(C) Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
(D) Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.
(E) Because the traditional wooden sleds can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.


Summarize the argument..

PREMISE: Kids used to use wooden sleds
PREMISE: 10 years ago, plastic sleds came
PREMISE: plastic sleds are faster and harder to steer and slow
PREMISE: more kids injured last year than 10 years ago
CONCLUSION: plastic sleds are more dangerous

Now, check each answer choice and be sure to remind ourselves of the conclusion

(A) A few children still use traditional wooden sleds.
Does this weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds?
No.
If anything, it strengthens the argument by suggesting that most children ride on plastic sleds these days.
ELIMINATE A

(B) Very few children wear any kind of protective gear, such as helmets, while sledding.
Does this weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds?
No.
IF it were the case that all/most children wore protective gear 10 years ago and, nowadays, they DON'T wear protective gear, then that would weaken the argument, since we could say that the lack of protective gear (and not the plastic sleds) caused the increase in injuries
However, since we aren't told that this is the case, we can ELIMINATE B

(C) Plastic sleds can be used in a much wider variety of snow conditions than wooden sleds can.
Does this weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds?
Yes!
This means that children with plastic sleds can do A LOT MORE sledding than they can do with wooden sleds.
So, it seems that the increase in sledding opportunities (and not the plastic sleds) is what caused the increase in injuries
KEEP C

(D) Most sledding injuries occur when a sled collides with a tree, a rock, or another sled.
Does this weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds?
No.
If anything, it strengthens the argument, since the difficult-to-steer plastic sleds will likely run into a lot more trees etc.
ELIMINATE D

(E) Because the traditional wooden sleds can carry more than one rider, an accident involving a wooden sled can result in several children being injured.
Does this weaken the conclusion that plastic sleds are more dangerous than wooden sleds?
No.
ELIMINATE E

Answer: C

Cheers,
Brent
_________________

Brent Hanneson – GMATPrepNow.com
Image
Sign up for our free Question of the Day emails

Re: In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter &nbs [#permalink] 19 Mar 2018, 09:42
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In the past, most children who went sledding in the winter snow in Ver

  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®.