Dear All

I have chosen A; Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.

My understanding and rationale was that older group drove same as the younger group and hence argument stands fine.

Going through a few threads, noticed some other interpretation of statement A.

Please can anyone confirm if my interpretation is correct ?

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.

main point by negation:
high experience and habit of caution will not make >65 older people safer then younger people
given that a) 3% injured in >65 group which is the lowest in the statistics of licensed drivers

pre-think
1. old people dont drive their own cars, rather young drivers do it for them
2. old people dont drive frequntly as young people do
3. old people drive less distance than young peope do

look at the options:
(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
it matches the pre-think above.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
this is what mentioned in the passage. hence its just para-phase. hence incorrect

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.
if old guy more likely to drive in bad weather, then chance of accidents will go high not low. hence it is just the opposite.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.
this is some stupid logic. 16%-11% = 5% attributed to exp of old guy ??. incorrect

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.
it says there is no age group which has lower than 3% accident rate. even if there is an age group with lower than
3%, it can be >75,>85, <50,<30. not a concrete statement. hence incorrect

for most of types of cr questions, such as, weaken, assumption, evaluate, flaw question, we need to know how to criticize/attack the argument. the main point on cr gmat tests us is how to attack an argument. inference question is like reading question.

though we do not learn and remember argument patterns, we can learn how to attack arguments . learn how to attack an argument , do not learn the argument pattern.

this argument is based on statistics. one typical way to attack statistic argument is to show that the statistics is not representative. this is very basic, but we need to do some statistic argument to be able to attack statistics.

how to attack this argument.

if the police dislike the young drivers, they fine them more. so, the rate of accident dose not show that the younger drive less carefully and the argument is broken

second way. if the older drivers give money to police , so, police dose not fine the older drivers. in this case the rate of accident dose not show that the older driver drive more carefully and the argument broke.

third way. if the older drivers drive less, the rate of accident dose not show that the older drivers drive more carefully and the arugment broke.
this is the answer choice A.

Does the following change in emphasis change your interpretation?

"...drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are."

It should. I haven't changed any of the words here, but note that the conclusion is written in order to compare two groups. More specifically, the author is using "the ______________" to refer back to the two explicit age groups that were introduced at the start of the passage.

If the author intended to make an absolute comparison between drivers older than 65 and all drivers younger than 65, we would see language that explicitly draws this kind of comparison. But we don't see such language, and we know that the author has already set us up for a comparison of two specifically defined groups -- and we won't want to drift away from that comparison when interpreting the conclusion.

I hope this helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | Instagram | 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 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

GMATNinja
VeritasKarishma
can option c be thought as:
negating c:

Drivers 65 and older are equally or more likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.

So if their likelihood is more in driving accident prone envt and still they have less accident rate so their expeience has definitely made them better drivers.
So in a way it is a strengthener ,is my reasoning correct?

sayiurway - An assumption is an unstated fact in the given argument. Option C introduces an outside information to the argument. So for sure this can not be an assumption. There are many very good posts that can teach you how to make an assumption framework and find assumption in any question. Be sure to check them.

Just to be more sure, Can we definitely say that serious accidents take place more during bad weather? It is possible that the 65-and-older group drive more in bad weather and are yet less involved in serious accidents. Similarly, the younger drivers might be involved in serious accidents even when driving in normal weather conditions. So, this option need not be true for my conclusion to be true.
_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2 | How to Improve GMAT Quant from Q49 to a Perfect Q51

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases | Subjunctive Mood

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents.
CONCLUSION: These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
CORRECT.
Negation: Drivers 65 and older, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
If this is so, the argument collapses because we will be comparing two dissimilar quantum. People who drive more will have more probability of being in accidents than people who drive less. So argument has to assume that there is no significant difference in the number of miles that both age groups drive.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
INCORRECT.
Negate this: Drivers 65 and older constitute a larger percentage of licensed drivers than drivers ages 18-24 do.
If this is the case, the argument is actually strengthened. 5% of a larger base means lower number of accidents in the age group. However, this can't be the reason according to the conclusion.
So even if we negate, the conclusion isn't harmed.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.
IRRELEVANT. Weather conditions may be a factor but is not essential here.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.
IRRELAVANT. Does not consider age group 65 and older, the age group on which the argument's conclusion is based.

(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.
TRAP. The age bracket could be lower than 65 or above 65. So this cannot be an assumption even if we negate this.