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.
It appears that you are browsing the GMAT Club forum unregistered!
Signing up is free, quick, and confidential.
Join other 500,000 members and get the full benefits of GMAT Club
Registration gives you:
Tests
Take 11 tests and quizzes from GMAT Club and leading GMAT prep companies such as Manhattan GMAT,
Knewton, and others. All are free for GMAT Club members.
Applicant Stats
View detailed applicant stats such as GPA, GMAT score, work experience, location, application
status, and more
Books/Downloads
Download thousands of study notes,
question collections, GMAT Club’s
Grammar and Math books.
All are free!
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
27 Jun 2017, 03:14
for most cr question types, except for inference question, we have to criticize the argument before going to answer choices.
we need to practice just a few ten questions to get the ability to criticize. do not remember pattern of argument though some pattern of argument give us ability to criticize.
inhere, the statistics show that the older persons get less accident because they are experience. we can criticize many way way 1. what if the police dislike the young persons and fine them more way 2, what if the older person drive less.
some argument is easy to criticize, other arguments are hard to criticize. try to find out two point of criticization for practice like i do above.
this process is prethinking which e gmat course advance. I think it is great. dont go to answer choice before prethinking because we have no thing to deal with the answer choices.
_________________
visit my facebook to help me. on facebook, my name is: thang thang thang
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
27 Jun 2017, 07:55
Imo A Only A holds rest of the option are no good. Basically we have to conclude that people aged 65 or more are good in driving because of their experience . If we try to negate A the argument does not hold . If we people aged 65 or more drive less than people who are 24 or less then the conclusion can be drawn . So A is the necessary assumption.
_________________
We are more often frightened than hurt; and we suffer more from imagination than from reality
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
29 Jun 2017, 18:28
Hi Everyone,
This question is driving me crazy and I'm really hoping I can get some guidance from some of the experts on this. GmatNinja, your response would be fantastic as I think my problem stems from a lack of precision that you described in your beginner's CR guide.
when I read this question I thought I had paraphrased it as follows:
1. PREMISE: Experience leads to lower accident rates 2. CONCLUSION: Therefore, the lower accident rate of those 65 years and older is due to experience
I thought that answer choice E was an assumption because if it were true, then I thought it would mean that experience did not lead to lower accident rates since there would be an instance for which someone would have more experience (those older than 65) but still not have lower accident rates. However, I think that would only be true if the argument had read:
1. PREMISE: Experience is the only factor that affects accident rates 2. CONCLUSION: Therefore, the lower accident rate of those 65 years and older is due to experience
Can an expert please respond to my post with their thoughts? I'm really trying to diagnose why I did something like this.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
29 Jun 2017, 18:57
quietreader wrote:
Hi Everyone,
This question is driving me crazy and I'm really hoping I can get some guidance from some of the experts on this. GmatNinja, your response would be fantastic as I think my problem stems from a lack of precision that you described in your beginner's CR guide.
I'm pleased to help you.
quietreader wrote:
1. PREMISE: Experience leads to lower accident rates 2. CONCLUSION: Therefore, the lower accident rate of those 65 years and older is due to experience
Your premise is wrong. I see that, as you've written, the premise isn't different from the conclusion.
The argument is like this: PREMISE: (provide evidence) young people (under 24) are more likely to get involved in serious accidents than older people (above 65). CONCLUSION: the greater experience and developed habits of caution possesses by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are. (older people are less likely to get involved in serious accidents because they have greater exp and developed habits of caution)
quietreader wrote:
I thought that answer choice E was an assumption because if it were true, then I thought it would mean that experience did not lead to lower accident rates since there would be an instance for which someone would have more experience (those older than 65) but still not have lower accident rates.
Hey, this is an assumption question, and the assumption must support the conclusion As your thought, choice E weakens the argument so it cant be the correct answer.
_________________
Now option C talks about Caution in age 65+ drivers. Why it can't be an assumption? Is it, on the other hand, fair to say that: C is an inference from the argument?
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.
----------
Easiest Technique is definitely to negate the reasoning author used to arrive at the conclusion. Experience & habits of caution make older people safer behind the wheels than younger one. Lets try to break the reasoning. 1. What if cars used by older and younger people are not alike i.e. Younger people cars are more prone to accidents - lack of ABS system etc. 2. What if they drive less 3. What if younger people in Wareland have habit of driving after drinking. 4. What if there is a system installed in older people car that intimate them about careless driving or over speeding. or Auto Car driving
All these things point to the fact that it is not experience that makes older people safer behind the wheels.
Trap Answers / Wrong answers will be
1. any choice that talks about relative numbers of licensed drivers as explained by GMATNinja in a reply - as in B 2. Choice C is classical trap as it talks about older people Habit of Caution. It more of strengthens the argument. 3. Simply repeating any given information in the argument - Choice D ( it is stated already that Experience is the key to safe driving) 4. Since Choice E is debated alot. lets assume that age group 45-50 have low accident rates than 65 or any othe rage group. It could be for experience (strengthen arguments.
Premise: More experiences leads to better driving Conclusion: People 65 and older are better at driving, and this improvement is due to their increase in experience
I interpreted answer choice (E) as basically saying: there is a case in which more experience did not necessarily lead to better driving, since there would be an age group that had less experience but had lower accident rates.
Can you confirm why my logic is flawed? This question is driving me nuts!
Paraphrasing CR passages can be dangerous. The language choice is so important in these passages, and if you change the word choice when paraphrasing the passage, you might change the entire meaning of the passage! So, when are you trying to understand the structure of a CR argument, use the author's words as much as possible.
The conclusion is not simply that drivers in the 65-and-older group ARE safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are; rather, the conclusion is "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". Also, notice that the author uses the word "safer" not "better". Although you might think safer is better, this is not stated in the passage!
As for choice (E), the argument is only concerned with comparing drivers in the 65-and-older group to drivers ages 21-24, and the author does NOT say that the 65-and-older group is necessarily the SAFEST group. For example, drivers ages 60-65 might have a lower accident rate than drivers in the 65-and-older group, but this would not impact the author's argument.
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.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
09 Jul 2017, 06:00
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.[/quote]
Conclusion - 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 Pre-thinking - Only best drives last such old age or they use the best type of cars
A - This could be a trouble for conclusion B - That doesn't affect, we have to deal with once who are licensed C- That's good. They make use of their experience. D- Okay. That helps strengthen. E- Yes, there is one. What impact will it have? That's an outlier group. (Negation)
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.
Good one. thanks for sharing. Argument Paraphrased Greater percentage of drivers below 24 were in accidents than drivers over 65 years in age. This means experience makes drivers develop habits that make them safer.
Assumption Drivers in both these age groups drive the same amount of time.
A - 65 and older drive the same amount as drivers 24 and younger. Keep. B - They both contribute the same share towards licensed drivers in the area. Well, even if they contributed more to the total, they (65+ group) could still be safer drivers. Out. C - This is adding a new dimension to the argument, which wasn't in the context of the original argument. Out. D - This is comparing 2 groups that is considered as the same in the argument. Out. E - This has gone beyond what the argument was trying to say. Out.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
09 Jul 2017, 21:37
Why E is not the valid assumption? Argument states with age growth due to increase in experience, accidents are fewer. Assumption could that the same trend follows in the age group between 24 to <65 . Why not E?
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Jul 2017, 04:10
GMATNinja wrote:
Even if "there are more older drivers who are involved in serious accidents", that would not necessarily break the argument. If a smaller percentage of older drivers is involved in serious accidents, this can still be used as evidence to argue that older drivers are safer behind the wheel.
For example, if 10% of the residents of the United States of America like to drink tea, that would be about 30 million people. If 50% of the residents of Great Britain like to drink tea, that would also be about 30 million people. Even though the absolute numbers are about the same, we can still conclude that, on average, the residents of Great Britain prefer tea more than residents of the USA.
And thank you for all of the great replies on this, everybody! As always, feel free to use the "Request Expert Reply" button to post specific questions not already addressed in this thread.
I felt into the trap of (B) too... it is very tempting... but percentage is the determining figure... the actual number is irrelevant. Maybe my brain is thrown out of the window when trying this one
Your explanation is great, as always! +kudos to you
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Jul 2017, 04:20
This is an exposure type of question: the lower accident rate may be due to lower exposure rather than higher quality of the subject. Answer choice A illustrates this perfectly.
_________________
Offering top quality online and offline GMAT tutoring service in Vietnam, Southeast Asia, and worldwide.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Jul 2017, 05:54
guialain wrote:
I was stuck between E and A. Went for E because if there is a bracket age for which the accident rate is lower than that of 65 and older, the the conclusion is challenged.
Don't know why E is not right.
Even if we have an age group, say 45-55 years old, which has accident rate of only 1%. Does it make the following statement wrong-
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. NO. Still you can say that 65 years old people are much safer behind the wheels. RIGHT?
I guess you understood from conclusion that Higher AGE means Safer driver. Though initially the sentence goes on to say that only, but brings in a specific group ( age>= 65) into the statement.
While making assumption question we should try to break the conclusion ONLY. BUT YAH THIS WAS A TOUGH ONE!!
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Jul 2017, 06:12
rekhabishop wrote:
arvind910619 wrote:
Chose B . But realized later after careful reading that answer is A. Tricky question though
Hey,
I have the same question. Why isn't B correct?
Hi, I will try to answer-
OPTION B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
First Problem is- Usage of percentage, Because we are comparing percentage already in the question stem, which says 3 out every 100 people in the age group are met with the accident as compared 11 out of hundred people in the age group of 21 and above. etc. So even if know people of age group >=65 with license are much greater than rest of the group, we will reach the same conclusion.
Second Problem is ( NOTE- this is debatable, but I will like to put my point)- Even if in option B, instead of percentage, number was mentioned. Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger NUMBER of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.. IMO opinion this will only strengthen the conclsuion. if I negate this statement, the statement become - Drivers 65 and older do notconstitute a significantly larger NUMBER of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.[/highlight].. With more number of people of age group 65++ on road, practically I should expect more accidents, but percentage of accident is still LOW. ( I understand this is debatable, but this was enough to remove this option by POE)
Hope it helps . Please press kudos if you like this answer
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 [#permalink]
Show Tags
10 Jul 2017, 08:04
rekhabishop wrote:
arvind910619 wrote:
Chose B . But realized later after careful reading that answer is A. Tricky question though
Hey,
I have the same question. Why isn't B correct?
Say there are 10,000 drivers. Out of them 5000 are > 65 y.o., and 100 are <24 y.o.. Does the author assume the number of drivers? I don't think so, because he/she is talking about % of drivers.
Negating this answer choice strengthens the argument: "Drivers 65 and older constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do." As mentioned above, there are 5,000 out of 10,000 who are over 65, and still % of accidents is low -> strengthens the argument.
_________________
We’ve given one of our favorite features a boost! You can now manage your profile photo, or avatar , right on WordPress.com. This avatar, powered by a service...
Sometimes it’s the extra touches that make all the difference; on your website, that’s the photos and video that give your content life. You asked for streamlined access...
A lot has been written recently about the big five technology giants (Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Apple, and Facebook) that dominate the technology sector. There are fears about the...
Post today is short and sweet for my MBA batchmates! We survived Foundations term, and tomorrow's the start of our Term 1! I'm sharing my pre-MBA notes...
As your thought, choice E weakens the argument so it cant be the correct answer.
