GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 21 Jul 2018, 00:46

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 Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11

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

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Status: Striving to get that elusive 740
Joined: 04 Jun 2017
Posts: 47
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V35
GPA: 3.7
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Reviews Badge
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Jul 2017, 10:00
hrishikeshsawle wrote:
Can anyone explain why E is incorrect.

If there is any age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than that of age group 65 and older then conclusion is challenged. It means there is an age group having lesser driving experience but able to drive safely compared with age group 65 & older.


In absence of Option A, i would have gone with E

But now, if you think about it, people from age group 24-64 are actually out of scope. Also, it would have challenged the conclusion on one front as option B has a limited sample and it does not include the given sample (<24 ).

If you read Option A, it caters to all the age groups. And even if Option E was true, Option A would still have existed. Hence, assumption-wise A is more strong.



+1 Kudos if it helps
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Jun 2017
Posts: 64
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2017, 10:08
i thought it wasD. can sumbdy explain to me
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 21 Dec 2014
Posts: 64
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
Schools: Duke '21
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.8
WE: Other (Other)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jul 2017, 03:53
For those who do not know why E is incorrect:
"Age bracket" means a group of people having approximately the same age. So it is comparing the group of 65 or older with the other group of age. So it irrelevant.
Hope it helps
_________________

Kudo is nothing but encouragement!

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 13 Apr 2017
Posts: 22
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GRE 1: Q164 V146
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Sep 2017, 21:37
hrishikeshsawle wrote:
Can anyone explain why E is incorrect.

If there is any age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than that of age group 65 and older then conclusion is challenged. It means there is an age group having lesser driving experience but able to drive safely compared with age group 65 & older.



E is supporting the answer, it can't be considered as an assumption.
_________________

princeton-1: 470
princeton-2: 590
princeton-3: 460
princeton-4: 610
gmat club cat: 620
manhatten-1: 680
veritas: 650
princeton-5: 700
princeton-6: 610
manhatten-2: 740
kaplan: 750
princeton-7: 700
manhatten-3: 780
gmat prep 1: 770
princeton-8: 680
manhatten-4: 780
princeton-9: 710
gmat prep 2: 740
manhatten-5: 780
princeton-10: 710

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 85
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2017, 00:09
E is not correct because it doesn't necessarily talk about accident rate for the licensed drivers of another age group, just another age group. Irrelevant comparison.

A. If we negate A we get Drivers 65 and older do, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger. If this is true, the conclusion breaks down.
_________________

Give me kudos and see what happens to your GMAT score :-)

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 425
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2017, 21:41
hazelnut wrote:
The Official Guide for GMAT Review 2018

Practice Question
Question No.: CR 635

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.



A & B

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.

So we are attributing less percentage figure (3%) to greater experience and developed habits of caution
if we can prove that figure is less because of some other reason that will weaken the conclusion.

lets say there are total 2700 people old above 65. 3% of these will be 81.
and no of young people 300 and 27% of this will be 81.

this doesn't do anything to conclusion.
if the premise is : In Wareland last year, no. of licensed drivers under 21 and no. of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. are more than no. of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents.

and if we can say even if no. of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents are less but % of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents then it wouldn't have been right.


A is weakener.
2 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 26 Dec 2015
Posts: 277
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
WE: Investment Banking (Venture Capital)
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Oct 2017, 10:58
2
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?


For Assumption problems, I first ID the Conclusion from the Passage (highlighted above), then NEGATE each A/C to see which one BREAKS the Argument's Conclusion


(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
- Correct. Drivers 65+ are not SAFER behind the wheel...they just drive a LOT less, so the probability of them getting into accidents is far less.

(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
- Opposite. When negated, this strengthens the conclusion.

(C) Drivers 65 and older are no less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.
- Incorrect. Drivers 65+ could be AS likely as drivers 24 and younger.

(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is not attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.
- Incorrect. What about the "developed habits" mentioned in the passage? also, "the difference" is ambiguous -- MAIN difference? ONLY difference? Are there other differences that should be inferred here?

(E) There is no an age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.
- Incorrect. Does not address whether the licensed drivers 65+ years old have more/better driving experience AND better developed habits.

Kudos please if you find this helpful :)
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 18 Oct 2017
Posts: 11
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Dec 2017, 03:26
With my pre-thinking I was searching for option A(core thought) but got confused with wonderful sentence wording in option A - "drive very many fewer miles per year". Is this type of wording to make question more hard/tough ?
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 23 Sep 2016
Posts: 228
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Dec 2017, 03:56
I think the oa is weakening the argument whereas we need to find the assumption please explain thanks in advance
Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 284
CAT Tests
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Dec 2017, 12:57
1
rishabhmishra wrote:
I think the oa is weakening the argument whereas we need to find the assumption please explain thanks in advance

rishabhmishra, check out this post below and see if that helps. If not, please explain your reasoning, and we'll try to assist you!

Please use the request verbal experts' reply button to help ensure we don't overlook your questions!
_________________

www.gmatninja.com

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 23 Sep 2016
Posts: 228
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2017, 00:09
GMATNinjaTwo wrote:
rishabhmishra wrote:
I think the oa is weakening the argument whereas we need to find the assumption please explain thanks in advance

rishabhmishra, check out this post below and see if that helps. If not, please explain your reasoning, and we'll try to assist you!

Please use the request verbal experts' reply button to help ensure we don't overlook your questions!

Sorry but i didn't find any post that is saying why we are doing weakening instead of finding an assumption.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 01 Jun 2015
Posts: 232
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, International Business
GMAT 1: 620 Q48 V26
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2017, 06:05
avi1787 wrote:
Someone please explain how B is incorrect.

Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
Yes, if we negate this, and take this scenario.

total licensed drivers-1000
65 and older- 700
under 24- 100
others-200

3% of 700, is ~20
10% of 100 is ~10

So there are more number of older drivers who are involved in serious accidents which breaks the argument that they are safer than younger ones. Although the question mentions %, why cant we use numbers? We follow this strategy for many % related CR problems.

Where am i missing?


What you are missing my friend is what the questions asks.You assumed that the percentage is based on the total no of drivers but it is actually based on the total number of accidents.
Suppose the total number of accidents are 50.
Then according to the percentage the number of drivers faced accidents are

Under 21 contains 8
21-24 contains 5
over 65 contains 2


Now you see that how small the group of 65 years old faced accidents

so the assumption is vulnerable and hence not correct my friend.
Expert Post
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 284
CAT Tests
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Dec 2017, 11:10
rishabhmishra wrote:
GMATNinjaTwo wrote:
rishabhmishra wrote:
I think the oa is weakening the argument whereas we need to find the assumption please explain thanks in advance

rishabhmishra, check out this post below and see if that helps. If not, please explain your reasoning, and we'll try to assist you!

Please use the request verbal experts' reply button to help ensure we don't overlook your questions!

Sorry but i didn't find any post that is saying why we are doing weakening instead of finding an assumption.

Sorry rishabhmishra, I misunderstood your question.

Choice (A) does not weaken the OA. If choice (A) were NOT true (i.e. "Drivers 65 and older DO, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger."), then that would indeed weaken the argument. Thus, we need to assume that choice (A) is true in order for the argument to hold.
_________________

www.gmatninja.com

Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 11 Jul 2016
Posts: 5
Location: Iceland
GMAT 1: 460 Q23 V31
GMAT 2: 530 Q36 V26
GPA: 4
CAT Tests
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 May 2018, 16:01
I still can't shake why (E) is incorrect, as the argument would fall apart if it stands. The argument states that with age and experience drivers become safer drivers, so if another (younger) age bracket would show a far lower rate (let's say age 35-40) wouldn't the argument crumble?
1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 673
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Premium Member Reviews Badge
In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 May 2018, 18:50
1
svanbergh13 wrote:
I still can't shake why (E) is incorrect, as the argument would fall apart if it stands. The argument states that with age and experience drivers become safer drivers, so if another (younger) age bracket would show a far lower rate (let's say age 35-40) wouldn't the argument crumble?

I might not be an expert, but will try to illustrate how i interpreted the question.

< 21 - 16%
21 - 24 - 11%
.
.
>65 - 3 %

Conclusion: >65 year olds are better in driving than younger people (all <65 are younger people i.e. 97% accidents, so even if few age groups have less than 3% we need to check on an average, the trap is that younger means not the specific people but on a whole average) because of experience.

A says that : These guys DO NOT drive FAR FEW miles than younger people. (if they drive far few miles then this conclusion crumbles saying you can't take an accident rate and judge them, saying that they are making LESS accidents because of experience. If they drive far few miles, It makes them(>65 year old) less prone to accidents.)

E : though at start i opted this option too. what if there exists an age group 35-40 that has less than 3% accidents. So what that 97 % is averaged to 20-65 year old, who have 97% accidents, on average do more accidents right!.

So A is best over E.

Answer should be A.

No wonder this is OG question. OG Never forgets to entice us with each and every question.

Note: Sorry, I just woke up so please be lenient on my English on this post. I tried to correct some grammar errors but am still sleepy.
Expert Post
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1840
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 May 2018, 08:24
Nightmare007 wrote:
svanbergh13 wrote:
I still can't shake why (E) is incorrect, as the argument would fall apart if it stands. The argument states that with age and experience drivers become safer drivers, so if another (younger) age bracket would show a far lower rate (let's say age 35-40) wouldn't the argument crumble?

I might not be an expert, but will try to illustrate how i interpreted the question.

< 21 - 16%
21 - 24 - 11%
.
.
>65 - 3 %

Conclusion: >65 year olds are better in driving than younger people (all <65 are younger people i.e. 97% accidents, so even if few age groups have less than 3% we need to check on an average, the trap is that younger means not the specific people but on a whole average) because of experience.

A says that : These guys DO NOT drive FAR FEW miles than younger people. (if they drive far few miles then this conclusion crumbles saying you can't take an accident rate and judge them, saying that they are making LESS accidents because of experience. If they drive far few miles, It makes them(>65 year old) less prone to accidents.)

E : though at start i opted this option too. what if there exists an age group 35-40 that has less than 3% accidents. So what that 97 % is averaged to 20-65 year old, who have 97% accidents, on average do more accidents right!.

So A is best over E.

Answer should be A.

No wonder this is OG question. OG Never forgets to entice us with each and every question.

Note: Sorry, I just woke up so please be lenient on my English on this post. I tried to correct some grammar errors but am still sleepy.

Thanks Nightmare007 for the explanation!

Yes, as described in this post, "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."
_________________

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

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Status: IF YOU CAN DREAM IT, YOU CAN DO IT
Joined: 03 Jul 2017
Posts: 211
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, International Business
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 May 2018, 02:21
Im still skeptical on choice C since C says that drivers 65 and older are less likely to drive when there is bad weather and this show that they are cautious and hence strengthen the conclusion and assumption can be a statement that strengthen the conclusion . So why not C ??
Expert Post
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 284
CAT Tests
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 May 2018, 14:53
longhaul123 wrote:
Im still skeptical on choice C since C says that drivers 65 and older are less likely to drive when there is bad weather and this show that they are cautious and hence strengthen the conclusion and assumption can be a statement that strengthen the conclusion . So why not C ??

See if this post helps.

If not, feel free to use the request verbal experts' reply button. Thanks!
_________________

www.gmatninja.com

Director
Director
User avatar
D
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 601
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jun 2018, 19:39
Conclusion: Older drivers are safer than younger drivers.
Premise: A smaller percentage of older drivers are involved in serious accidents.

Because this is an assumption question, we know that the correct answer, when negated, will undermine the conclusion.

(A)- Negated: Drivers 65 and older DO, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.

Well, if the older drivers are driving many fewer miles than the younger drivers are covering, then it's not necessarily the case that older drivers are avoiding accidents because they're driving more safely. Rather, they're avoiding accidents because they're just driving less. Because A, when negated, undermines the conclusion, we know we're looking at the correct answer.

(B)- Negated - Drivers 65 and older constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do. ---- First of how much significant is really going to matter, moreover what if 3% of that exceeds the number of young drivers who met serious accidents

Between A and B, A seems a better choice. Rest choices can be eliminated very easily.
_________________

Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

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

Best Gmat Resource:
GmatPrep CR|GmatPrep SC|GmatPrep RC

Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 &nbs [#permalink] 12 Jun 2018, 19:39

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 59 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11

  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®.