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:
Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re [#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 13 Jul 2017, 01:08
2
7
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
5% (low)
Question Stats:
89% (00:54) correct 11% (01:09) wrong based on 1756 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition
Practice Question Question No.: 1 Page: 116 Difficulty:
Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below?
Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and _______.
(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted (B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children (C) many of the fires started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents (D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old (E) approximately 5,000 fires per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required
Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re [#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Sep 2013, 15:00
5
honchos wrote:
Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below? Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..
(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted (B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children (C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents (D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old (E) approximately 5,000 fires per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required
What is the stratregy for solving such question types.
There's not really a quick-fix strategy for these, other than critical thinking and careful reading. One thing that helps is paying attention to all the "logic" words of the argument: "therefore", "since", "because", "although", etc.
Here' the last, incomplete sentence of that argument: Butthis change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters,becausechildren given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety leversand ……….. I've highlighted the "logic" words. The initial "but" indicates a sharp contrast with the previous sentence, and this is consistent with content. First sentence --- manufacturers try to solve a problem by introducing safety levers --- then contrast --- BUT, this doesn't solve the problem.
Then we get the "because", and then reason #1, and then the word "and", which indicates we need another, parallel reason --- that is to say, another reason why introducing safety levers to lighters will NOT solve the problem of children playing with them & starting fires. Which answer choice could be another reason why introducing the safety levers will not solve the problem of kids playing with fire & burning houses down? (A) economic, irrelevant (B) this could be an additional reason, that would work well with reason #1 (C) has nothing to do with the introduction of safety levers (D) the opposite of what we want, something that makes the lighters with safety levers more safe (E) data from before safety levers were introduced, irrelevant
Pay attention to logic words always in GMAT CR. These subtle "signposts" make all the different in the flow of the argument, and in "complete the argument" CR questions, they are absolutely crucial for identifying precisely what you need in the blank.
Does this make sense? Mike _________________
Mike McGarry Magoosh Test Prep
Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)
Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re [#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Sep 2013, 15:46
1
This is not a 700 level question, considering the fact that it is the first one of the 13th OG
Only B is related to the argument and provide a logical conclusion
Parents leave the new lighter in places that are fewer safe than the previous lighter version because they are assured that children do not touch them, but instead children do
_________________
Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re [#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Sep 2013, 15:48
mikemcgarry wrote:
honchos wrote:
Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below? Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..
(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted (B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children (C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents (D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old (E) approximately 5,000 fires per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required
What is the stratregy for solving such question types.
There's not really a quick-fix strategy for these, other than critical thinking and careful reading. One thing that helps is paying attention to all the "logic" words of the argument: "therefore", "since", "because", "although", etc.
Here' the last, incomplete sentence of that argument: Butthis change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters,becausechildren given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety leversand ……….. I've highlighted the "logic" words. The initial "but" indicates a sharp contrast with the previous sentence, and this is consistent with content. First sentence --- manufacturers try to solve a problem by introducing safety levers --- then contrast --- BUT, this doesn't solve the problem.
Then we get the "because", and then reason #1, and then the word "and", which indicates we need another, parallel reason --- that is to say, another reason why introducing safety levers to lighters will NOT solve the problem of children playing with them & starting fires. Which answer choice could be another reason why introducing the safety levers will not solve the problem of kids playing with fire & burning houses down? (A) economic, irrelevant (B) this could be an additional reason, that would work well with reason #1 (C) has nothing to do with the introduction of safety levers (D) the opposite of what we want, something that makes the lighters with safety levers more safe (E) data from before safety levers were introduced, irrelevant
Pay attention to logic words always in GMAT CR. These subtle "signposts" make all the different in the flow of the argument, and in "complete the argument" CR questions, they are absolutely crucial for identifying precisely what you need in the blank.
Does this make sense? Mike
It is a long time I do not do simil.ar reasoning for a question. Maybe because my mind goes in auto mode :D
_________________
Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re [#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Sep 2013, 02:26
mikemcgarry wrote:
honchos wrote:
Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below? Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..
(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted (B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children (C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents (D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old (E) approximately 5,000 fires per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required
What is the stratregy for solving such question types.
There's not really a quick-fix strategy for these, other than critical thinking and careful reading. One thing that helps is paying attention to all the "logic" words of the argument: "therefore", "since", "because", "although", etc.
Here' the last, incomplete sentence of that argument: Butthis change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters,becausechildren given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety leversand ……….. I've highlighted the "logic" words. The initial "but" indicates a sharp contrast with the previous sentence, and this is consistent with content. First sentence --- manufacturers try to solve a problem by introducing safety levers --- then contrast --- BUT, this doesn't solve the problem.
Then we get the "because", and then reason #1, and then the word "and", which indicates we need another, parallel reason --- that is to say, another reason why introducing safety levers to lighters will NOT solve the problem of children playing with them & starting fires. Which answer choice could be another reason why introducing the safety levers will not solve the problem of kids playing with fire & burning houses down? (A) economic, irrelevant (B) this could be an additional reason, that would work well with reason #1 (C) has nothing to do with the introduction of safety levers (D) the opposite of what we want, something that makes the lighters with safety levers more safe (E) data from before safety levers were introduced, irrelevant
Pay attention to logic words always in GMAT CR. These subtle "signposts" make all the different in the flow of the argument, and in "complete the argument" CR questions, they are absolutely crucial for identifying precisely what you need in the blank.
Does this make sense? Mike
Thanks Mike, Bunuel, You and Karishma(From Veritas) has made Gmatclub.com into heaven for Gmat preparation. It is always encouraging when you guys immediately respond to personal requests, actually i was able to get to the correct answer, but your explanation has helped me to visualize the problem with a different perspective.
_________________
Like my post Send me a Kudos It is a Good manner. My Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-score-750-and-750-i-moved-from-710-to-189016.html
Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re [#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Sep 2013, 11:04
1
This question is asking for an additional reason why the safety levers are unlikely to result in a reduction of the fires caused by children. The argument already provides one reason - that the children can figure out the safety levers so now we need to make it more likely that they will be able to start fires. Answer choice B says that not only will they be able to work the lighters but also will have access to the lighters - therefore the safety levers will make little difference in the number of fires. Answer A only talks about expense which does not relate to the likelihood of fires Answer C does not address stopping children from starting fires, only that the fires can be quickly extinguished Answer D actually goes opposite of the argument, showing that there could be a reduction because children under 2 could not start fires. Answer E only tells us the number of fires, does not discuss whether children will be able to start the fires.
honchos wrote:
Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below? Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fi res caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..
(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted (B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children (C) many of the fi res started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents (D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old (E) approximately 5,000 fi res per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required
What is the stratregy for solving such question types.
_________________
Special offer! Save $250 on GMAT Ultimate Classroom, GMAT Small Group Instruction, or GMAT Liveonline when you use the promo code GCVERBAL250. Or, save $150 on GMAT Self-Prep when you use the code GCVERBAL150. Enroll at www.princetonreview.com
Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re [#permalink]
Show Tags
12 Dec 2016, 22:47
honchos wrote:
Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition
Practice Question Question No.: 1 Page: 116 Difficulty:
Which of the following, if true, most logically completes the argument below? Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-resistant by equipping them with safety levers. But this change is unlikely to result in a significant reduction in the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters, because children given the opportunity can figure out how to work the safety levers and ………..
(A) the addition of the safety levers has made lighters more expensive than they were before the requirement was instituted (B) adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children (C) many of the fires started by young children are quickly detected and extinguished by their parents (D) unlike child-resistant lighters, lighters that are not child-resistant can be operated by children as young as two years old (E) approximately 5,000 fires per year have been attributed to children playing with lighters before the safety levers were required
What is the strategy for solving such question types.
Type - explain the situation / paradox Pre- thinking - even with new safety levers , if the newer lighters are more accessible to children then the number of fires would not decrease
Answer B- adults are more likely to leave child-resistant lighters than non-child-resistant lighters in places that are accessible to children
_________________
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: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re [#permalink]
Show Tags
19 Mar 2017, 22:36
Argument Construction
Situation Manufacturers must equip all cigarette lighters with child-resistant safety levers, but children can figure out how to circumvent the safety levers and thereby often start fires.
Reasoning What point would most logically complete the argument? What would make it likely that the number of fires caused by children playing with lighters would remain the same?
In order for children to start fires using lighters equipped with safety levers, they must be given the opportunity to figure out how the safety levers work and then to use them. They must, that is, have access to the lighters.
A If safety-lever-equipped lighters are more expensive than lighters that are not so equipped, fewer lighters might be sold. This would most likely afford children less access to lighters, thus giving them less opportunity to start fires with them.
B Correct. This statement properly identifies a point that logically completes the argument: it explains why children are likely to have access to lighters equipped with safety levers.
C The speed with which fires are extinguished does not have any bearing on the number of fires that are started.
D This provides a reason to believe that the number of fires started by children will most likely decrease, rather than stay the same: fewer children will be able to operate the lighters, and thus fewer fires are likely to be started.
E This information about how many fires were started by children before safety levers were required does not have any bearing on the question of how many fires are likely to be started by children now that the safety levers are required.
The correct answer is B.
_________________
Thanks & Regards, Anaira Mitch
gmatclubot
Re: Manufacturers are now required to make all cigarette lighters child-re
[#permalink]
19 Mar 2017, 22:36
We’re rolling out updates to our privacy features and policies in the coming weeks. You’ll have more control over your personal information and more detail on what information we...
The scale and depth of opportunities presented by the quickly evolving digital entertainment industry in India is astounding. India is an ideal market for new digital entrants. With a...
The scale and depth of opportunities presented by the quickly evolving digital entertainment industry in India is astounding. India is an ideal market for new digital entrants. With a...
close
89% (00:54) correct 
