Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 Feb 2017, 13:09

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error,

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 18 Jun 2012
Posts: 37
GMAT Date: 09-17-2012
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 130 [4] , given: 26

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2012, 00:01
4
KUDOS
51
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

18% (02:48) correct 82% (01:30) wrong based on 3206 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

Which of the following is a presupposition of the argument above?

A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents.
B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies.
C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer.
D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents.
E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Status: Persevering
Joined: 15 May 2013
Posts: 225
Location: India
GMAT Date: 08-02-2013
GPA: 3.7
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 87 [5] , given: 34

### Show Tags

09 Jun 2014, 06:55
5
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
I believe D is explicitly stated in the argument itself and therefore is not valid. Plus we are not evaluating the argument here, but only need to mention the assumption.

Now the argument's conclusion says that only if investigation is done into automobile design, road design and in criteria to determine the eligibility (whether the driver has requisite skills or not), only then can the problem be prevented.

Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents. Well even if it is, this is not required for the conclusion, as it offers no support as to why investigations are required to prevent accidents.
B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies. Out of scope
C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer. Out of scope. Roads need to be better but for this to happen it is not mentioned that governmental regulations are required.
D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents. Valid apriori
E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained. True, because it is indirectly assumed with this statement "and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license" which implies that unless the requisite criteria is met (the driver is not well trained), the accident is bound to happen again, therefore accidents would not be prevented.
_________________

--It's one thing to get defeated, but another to accept it.

Intern
Joined: 18 Jun 2013
Posts: 4
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 11 [5] , given: 4

### Show Tags

09 Jun 2014, 17:06
5
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
E seems right to me.

argument is trying to convince that the insurance companies should investigate road designs and other factors, that means if these conditions are responsible for the accidents, drivers are more likely to be in accident again unless they are (re)trained to handle these conditions better next time.

where as D is not assumption, its stated in argument itself, additionally the word "should" reduces its chances of being right.

Posted from my mobile device
Director
Status: Final Countdown
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 563
Location: India
GPA: 3.82
WE: Account Management (Retail Banking)
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 283 [2] , given: 75

### Show Tags

14 Aug 2012, 04:20
2
KUDOS
_________________

" Make more efforts "
Press Kudos if you liked my post

Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2012
Posts: 170
GMAT 1: 700 Q43 V42
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 67 [2] , given: 29

### Show Tags

13 Jan 2013, 13:42
2
KUDOS
D

The argument states that insurance companies should analyze ways to prevent accidents as opposed to blaming driver error. The question asks for an assumption that this argument is based on. The argument is based on the assumption that investigating automobile accidents will lead to fewer future accidents.

I hope that helps

EDIT: I noticed you have E as the OA, which is incorrect. E is incorrect because the text never mentions anything about repeated accidents. Also, if drivers repeat the mistakes they make, analyzing road conditions would make no difference, as driver error would be 100% to blame for the accidents.
_________________

If my post helped you, please consider giving me kudos.

Senior Manager
Status: Prevent and prepare. Not repent and repair!!
Joined: 13 Feb 2010
Posts: 274
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.75
WE: Sales (Telecommunications)
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 90 [1] , given: 282

### Show Tags

14 Jan 2013, 01:06
1
KUDOS
I believe D is the answer here. It states investigation should prevent future accidents. That should be the assumption, else the argument fails.

E is out of scope for me.
_________________

I've failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed--Michael Jordan
Kudos drives a person to better himself every single time. So Pls give it generously
Wont give up till i hit a 700+

Intern
Joined: 27 Mar 2013
Posts: 25
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [1] , given: 74

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2014, 11:01
1
KUDOS
Question is to judge an assumption which means to identify the hidden thinking of the author .. Option D is already mentioned in the passage so it can't be the OA .

Just checked the answer with the expert its E
Intern
Joined: 12 May 2014
Posts: 13
Schools: Booth '17, Ross '16
GMAT Date: 09-02-2014
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 12 [1] , given: 4

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2014, 13:08
1
KUDOS
I may be wrong but this is my understanding.

The question asked - which of the following is the presupposition in the argument above?
Now, very clearly, the argument is - "Do not merely punish the driver, there could be other reasons for these accidents to occur which the author is recommending the insurance companies to look at and clearly suggests them that there is no point in punishing the driver times and again, until we do not check those hidden causes of the road accidents".

The presupposition that the author has made here is the fact that it has been considered that punishing the driver will help check the situation - these punishments logically are fines, license cancellations could be anything but pertaining to the driver and hence an indicative of retraining the driver doubting his abilities. Hence to me 'E' makes sense.

===
+1 Kudos for the help, is the best way to thank and contribute...
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7191
Location: Pune, India
Followers: 2173

Kudos [?]: 14055 [1] , given: 222

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2014, 20:26
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
ananthpatri wrote:
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

Which of the following is a presupposition of the argument above?

A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents.
B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies.
C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer.
D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents.
E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.

Responding to a pm:

I am not happy with both (D) and (E).

Here is the argument:
Insurance companies blame drivers for accidents and punish them.
Instead, they should try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license.

Conclusion: Investigation of roads, automobiles and drivers is necessary to issue guidelines to prevent future accidents.

(D) is not an assumption. "Investigation of automobile accidents" is too generic. We don't know what it means. Even if we assume that it means "try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road...", we are already given this. We are given that "investigation" is necessary to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents.

(E) is a little far fetched. The argument presupposes that people who make driving errors may not be eligible to drive i.e. they may be bad drivers and may need retraining. Now we don't know whether those drivers repeat those errors, commit other errors or other drivers commit the same errors. All the argument is saying is that we will not be able to prevent accidents by punishing the drivers alone.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Intern
Joined: 10 Oct 2014
Posts: 16
GPA: 3.47
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [1] , given: 51

### Show Tags

01 Oct 2015, 18:44
1
KUDOS
Clearly E

The argument states that the insurance companies can reduce crashes by providing guidelines on how drivers can avoid accidents. If the reason why people crash varies, then it will be impossible for the insurance companies to draw up any constructive guidelines.

However, if there are a finite number of reasons why people crash, and people crash for those reasons all the time, then the insurance company can write about how to avoid those driving errors and this will prevent crashes.

Think of it this way:
There is a blind turn on a mountain after a long stretch of straight road. If there is no warning that it is a hairpin turn, you and everyone else is going to take the turn too fast and fly off the mountain (I know I would). However if after multiple people have flown off the mountain, the government puts a sign that says "slow down, tight turn ahead," then you will take the turn more slowly and not fly off the mountain. i.e. if multiple people make the same mistake over and over and you put a warning that says "hey, don't do that," you'll prevent this mistake.
Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2770
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
Followers: 396

Kudos [?]: 1786 [1] , given: 22

### Show Tags

17 Dec 2016, 23:08
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
1988achilles wrote:
sukeshap wrote:
ananthpatri wrote:
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

Which of the following is a presupposition of the argument above?

A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents.
B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies.
C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer.
D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents.
E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.

Can any one tell the right answer and its explanation?
Otherwise we are loosing valuable time with GMAT club

Hi experts e-GMAT Daagh Magoosh,

Conclusion: Future accidents can be prevented ONLY by issuing guidelines by insurance companies (based on analysis of flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license.)
In other words, there is NO OTHER WAY to prevent future accidents than to issue guidelines.

Option E: Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.
Negate the above: Most drivers who make errors in driving DO NOT repeat those errors.

If the drivers do not repeat those errors, then at least some future accidents will be prevented because of the cautiousness of the drivers who already met with an accident. The cause of such prevention would then be that fact that those drivers already met with an accident and hence became cautious of not repeating them - the reason would not be that there were guidelines issued by insurance companies. Thus guidelines by insurance companies would not be the ONLY way to prevent future accidents. The argument breaks.

Since negated option E breaks the argument, option E is a required assumption.
Director
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 916
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Followers: 23

Kudos [?]: 721 [0], given: 322

### Show Tags

13 Jan 2013, 12:47
This needs a discussion folks,

plz pour on !!!
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Manager
Joined: 22 Dec 2012
Posts: 116
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 57

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2013, 12:16
D seems more appropriate. Please post OA explanation.
Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2013
Posts: 189
Location: United States (NY)
GMAT 1: 640 Q44 V34
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V40
GMAT 3: 720 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.16
WE: Consulting (Venture Capital)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 71

### Show Tags

10 Apr 2014, 17:25
Hi, so is the OE actually D? Can anyone confirm this for certain? Thanks!
_________________
Intern
Joined: 13 May 2013
Posts: 30
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 28

### Show Tags

15 Apr 2014, 02:47
m3equals333 wrote:
Hi, so is the OE actually D? Can anyone confirm this for certain? Thanks!

I also chose D. We need an expert here to confirm the OE is E. Thank you.
Manager
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Posts: 72
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 20

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2014, 08:50
ananthpatri wrote:
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

Which of the following is a presupposition of the argument above?

A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents.
B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies.
C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer.
D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents.
E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.

It seems D is the correct answer here. The similar question is there in the 1000 CR doc. (Test II, Question 16). @Bunuel can you please confirm.

Thanks

Last edited by chanakya84 on 21 Apr 2014, 00:03, edited 1 time in total.
Current Student
Joined: 15 Jan 2014
Posts: 89
Concentration: Healthcare, Strategy
GMAT 1: 710 Q0 V0
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2014, 13:28
I also chose D. E is out of scope - retraining drivers is never mentioned and insurance companies setting new guidelines does not equate to retraining drivers.

Can anyone prove that E is actually correct?
Manager
Joined: 04 Jan 2014
Posts: 129
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 24

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2014, 23:55
I chose D too. Experts advice, if any?
Manager
Joined: 24 Oct 2013
Posts: 181
Schools: LBS '18
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
WE: Design (Transportation)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 83

### Show Tags

09 Jun 2014, 16:23
Okay lets say you investigate and do not write guidelines. Does that contribute in preventing accidents? 'Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents'. So both Investigation AND Issuing guidelines can contribute, but neither of them alone can.
Director
Joined: 23 Jan 2013
Posts: 583
Schools: Cambridge'16
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 40

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2014, 20:51
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
ananthpatri wrote:
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

Which of the following is a presupposition of the argument above?

A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents.
B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies.
C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer.
D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents.
E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.

"Only then" in last sentence says that it is causal conclusion. So any assumption that eliminates alternative cause, reverse causation or data errors is true

A. It is main point but not an assumption
B. Out of scope at all
C. Introduces alternative cause but not eliminate it, so weakens conclusion
D. Answer that I selected but "analyzing flaws" is the same as investigation so it repeats the premise but we know that assumption is unstated premise
[highlight]E. Eliminate the drivers error as alternative factor to be considered [/highlight

Re: Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error,   [#permalink] 10 Jun 2014, 20:51

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 51 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
7 #Top150 CR: Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error 5 23 Sep 2015, 00:16
7 Instead of blaming an airline accident on pilot error, 22 07 Aug 2009, 11:13
Instead of blaming an airline accident on pilot error, 8 21 May 2009, 01:52
For similar cars and drivers, automobile insurance for 7 16 Jan 2008, 14:28
1 Instead of blaming an airline accident on pilot error, 8 05 Apr 2007, 10:39
Display posts from previous: Sort by