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.
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:
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.
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 possesses 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. If drivers 65 and older drive in a shorter distance, then the argument is challenged. The higher rate of serious accidents could be caused by driving in a very long distance
(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do. The argument focused about the percentage, not the absolute number. Hence this choice is irrelevant to the argument.
(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. This choice breaks the argument. This choice indicates that the lower rate of drivers 65 and older involved in serious accidents is due to the weather conditions rather than the experience.
(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 argument forcused on the different between 2 groups: >= 65 and (<=21 and 21-24)
(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older. Irrelevant _________________
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
02 Jun 2017, 12:12
1
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.
_________________
What was previously considered impossible is now obvious reality. In the past, people used to open doors with their hands. Today, doors open "by magic" when people approach them
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
03 Jun 2017, 01:14
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 Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 27 Sep 2017, 02:00
1
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.
The answer is A
A correct if people belonging to both the age group drive same number of mile then the argument is correct as the number of accidents that occurred would give correct picture about the safe driving habits.
B the share of group 65 years or older is not large this means there are fewer drivers with licence and this will result in lower accidents again not emphasis on habits thus leave this option .
C is out of scope it shifts the focus and cause of accidents to weather conditions .
D Again this option does not address the question rather new information may true but it does not tell us about the habits of driving.
E ok this may be true but again it does not tell us about the driving safe habits all it does is says the rate of accidents is lowest for people above 65 years.There can be may causes for that such as fewer number of people or fewer miles driven .
_________________
Please give kudos if you found my answers useful
Originally posted by arvind910619 on 03 Jun 2017, 07:41.
Last edited by arvind910619 on 27 Sep 2017, 02:00, edited 1 time in total.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
06 Jun 2017, 22:39
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 possesses by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.
Type -assumption Boil it down - 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.
(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger. - Correct (B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do. - Incorrect - the actual number does not matter as we are concerned with percentages (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.- Incorrect -On negation, this would mean drivers 65 and older are as likely or more likely than are drivers 24 and younger . If the likelihood is equal, then it does not affect . (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. - Irrelevant - the difference between these two groups is not a concern (E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older. - Irrelevant
Answer A
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long +1 Kudos if you find this post helpful
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
07 Jun 2017, 00:03
2
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.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
07 Jun 2017, 00:18
A- My presumption - every age group drove the same number of miles and same type of factors are taken into considerations. B - Irrelevant larger percentage of pop but can weaken a bit. C - Weakener. D - 21 to 24 is irrelevant. doesn't help our conclusion. E - Irrelevant - age bracket ?
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
07 Jun 2017, 19:07
1
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?
I too had a similar line of thought and hence marked answer as B.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 07 Jun 2017, 22:49
3
adityapareshshah wrote:
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?
I too had a similar line of thought and hence marked answer as B.
Experts please comment with your views.
Not a expert ,but still try to resolve this one ...
u already have ur answer but u r not visualizing it correctly..as correctly mentioned in above post, absolute number is out of scope here lets c why:
Stats given by you after negation:
in 700 ---- 20 accident --old aged in 100 --- 10 accident --younger one
Ur claim:"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. "
lets prove mathematically--probability of getting into a accident p(a) - 20/700 = 10/350=1/35 ---- means 1 out of 35 involves in accident-----old aged p(b) - 10/100 = 1 / 10 --- ----------means 1 out of 10 involves in a accident.---younger ones
who is safer ...???????????--OLD Aged definitely.
Here ,Stats provided after negating is helping to build argument--SO this option is incorrect............ Hope it helps..
Originally posted by sobby on 07 Jun 2017, 21:43.
Last edited by sobby on 07 Jun 2017, 22:49, edited 2 times in total.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
07 Jun 2017, 22:32
2
The argument gave us the comparison between 2 groups: 24 and younger & 65 and older, then it jumps to conclusion. Hence the assumption should be something to make this comparison to be true/makes sense, so the conclusion will be hold. The assumption should be relevant to these groups directly/indirectly. In this case the comparison is true/make sense only if both groups had no difference in driving experience last year. Hence the answer is A.
E did not do the job of proving that the comparison in the argument makes sense as it mentions something else other than talking about these two groups. Hence E cant be the answer.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
11 Jun 2017, 16:23
3
adityapareshshah wrote:
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?
I too had a similar line of thought and hence marked answer as B.
Experts please comment with your views.
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.
_________________
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.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
12 Jun 2017, 00:14
GMATNinja wrote:
adityapareshshah wrote:
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?
I too had a similar line of thought and hence marked answer as B.
Experts please comment with your views.
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.
Hi GmatNinja,
I was just curious, if the question had been a weakener with the following answer choices, which would have been the correct choice?
A) (A) Drivers 65 and older do, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
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
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 possesses 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.
our prethinking is the criticization of the argument before going to answer choices. to criticize, ask ourself any problem with logic of argument any problem with evidence of argument?
argument conclude that the caution and experience of old persons cause low rate of accident. any problem with logic of argument. maybe there is another cause. this would fallcify the argument. if there is no another cause, this would support argument
going to answer choices, choice A eliminate anther cause so, is an assumption.
_________________
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
22 Jun 2017, 18:06
1
1
saicharan1191 wrote:
Hi GmatNinja,
I was just curious, if the question had been a weakener with the following answer choices, which would have been the correct choice?
A) (A) Drivers 65 and older do, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
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
Choice (C) does not necessarily weaken the author's argument, which is that "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."
Because of their developed habits of caution, drivers 65 and older might avoid driving during dangerous weather conditions, making them less likely to be involved in serious accidents. In other words, even if (C) is true, both groups might drive the same amount on average. But if drivers 65 and over avoid driving when weather conditions are dangerous, that group might be, in general, safer behind the wheel. If that isn't clear, imagine one group that ONLY drives during dangerous storms and another group that ONLY drives when the weather is perfect. Even if all else is equal and both groups have the same level of driving skill, we can still say that members of the second group are safer behind the wheel because of the conditions they choose to drive in.
However, if drivers 65 and older simply drive much less than drivers 24 and younger, this might explain why the older drivers are less likely to be involved in serious accidents. This weakens the author's argument, which is that the figures are evidence that drivers 65 and older are safer drivers than those 24 and younger.
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.
After solving the question. I was a bit curious about option E. I felt that what if there exists an age bracket of 35- 65 which has 1% accident rate , while 65 + have 3 %. Won't the conclusion that " These figures clearly show that 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 " Break apart. Since younger drivers are safer behind the wheel than the older drivers. ? and experience is not the issue . ? Just curious though. Can you please let me know how it is irrelevant.
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
26 Jun 2017, 12:05
1
Top Contributor
1
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.
_________________
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
26 Jun 2017, 12:30
AbdurRakib wrote:
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.
The conclusion here is that 65 and older are safer drivers than younger because they have greater experience and cautious habits
A. Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger. Correct. This proves that 65 and older do not have an advantage over younger drivers as less driving means less probability of accidents. This also shows that they have more experience of driving as they are driving at least as many miles as younger one but for a longer time B. Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18–24 do.Irrelevant information. even licensed drivers can commit more accidents 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.Out of scope. Nothing is mentioned about the weather in the argument 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 option discusses a different age group E. There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.Out of scope
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11
[#permalink]
Show Tags
26 Jun 2017, 12:47
AbdurRakib wrote:
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.
Here we are comparing the percentages of serious accidents in case of drivers <24 yrs of age and drivers >65 years. %age of serious accidents=(No. of accidents in that age group)/(Total licensed in that age group)
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.
Prethinking: What if people just dont drive cars after 65. We need to negate such a possibility.
A. Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.-On negation the conclusion breaks down. Drivers 65 and ,on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.-In this case its not that they drive safe, its that they dont drive much. B. Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18–24 do.-Irrelevant 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.-This does strengthen the argument that indeed the drivers>65 drive safer because of the developed habits of caution, but this is not something that is required to support the argument. Negation does not break the argument 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.-Wrong comparison E. There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.-Irrelevant
_________________
Kudos for a correct solution
gmatclubot
Re: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 &nbs
[#permalink]
26 Jun 2017, 12:47
close
50% (01:28) correct 
