A lot of experts have already pitched in on why C or E would not be the answer. Ill try to add a little bit more to it.
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.
Flow of the para: As per stat on % of certain age group of drivers involved in serious accidents, it is concluded 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. Always make note of each word as it may give you the reason to eliminate a wrong choice.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
Quote:
(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
A strong contender from the very word go. You will find some other questions too with same logic/reasoning.
What if 65+ drivers drive just 10 miles a day on an average as compared to 200 miles a day by the younger group?: Very many fewer miles limit the probability or chances of the serious accidents.
Lesser the exposure to such conditions, lesser the chances of accidents.Quote:
(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
Had it been opposite, that is, 65+ constituted a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do,
the option could actually be a strengthener.It does not compare the time spent behind the wheel by each group.
Quote:
(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.
Might sound very tempting, but there are enough reasons to discard it.
1) Although none of the replies have spoken about it, I do believe this could be a valid reason to discard it.: The words -
safer 'behind the wheels'. So we are comparing the act of driving and not the act of 'avoiding driving'. Yes, it tells us that 65+ are cautious on time to be out on the road, but it really does not tell us about safe driving.
2) 65+ drivers may be avoiding driving during bad weather conditions, but they may be traveling on average more than young group, leading to more exposure.
Quote:
(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.
The group we are comparing 65+ with is 18-24, but this options talks of 21-24 year old drivers.
Quote:
(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.
We cannot be sure and this does not affect the comparison between two groups. 40-50 group may be the safest but it does not help the conclusion in any way.
A
_________________