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

It is currently 16 Jul 2018, 03:58

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

One year ago a local government initiated an antismoking

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

Hide Tags

3 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1248
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
One year ago a local government initiated an antismoking [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2010, 09:31
3
2
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  75% (hard)

Question Stats:

45% (01:30) correct 55% (01:23) wrong based on 194 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

One year ago a local government initiated an antismoking advertising campaign in local newspapers which it financed by imposing a tax on cigarettes of 20 cents per pack. One year later the number of people in the locality who smoke cigarettes had declined by 3 percent. Clearly, what was said in the advertisements had an effect, although a small one, on the number of people in the locality who smoke cigarettes.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to strengthen argument?
(A) Residents of the locality have not increased their use of other tobacco products such as snuff and chewing tobacco since the campaign went into effect.
(B) A substantial number of cigarette smokers in the locality who did not quit smoking during the campaign now smoke less than they did before it began.
(C) Admissions to the local hospital for chronic respiratory ailments were down by 15 percent one year after the campaign began.
(D) Merchants in the locality responded to the local tax by reducing the price at which they sold cigarettes by 20 cents per pack.
(E) Smokers in the locality had incomes that on average were 25 percent lower than those of nonsmokers.

_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit


GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2010
Posts: 88
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2010, 09:54
noboru,
can u pls explain how it was choice D. I thought option D would have weakened the argument. Reducing the price by 20 cents would have increased smoking. Isn't it?
2 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1350
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2010, 10:11
2
one key assumption in the argument would be that people may have quit smoking NOT because of the message but because of incr in price. D provides additonal evidence that in fact the price had not increased at all - which corroborates the conclusion that it was the message that cause ppl to reduce smoking.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 312
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2010, 10:45
Somehow ... I was sure of B ...but you know "its different"
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 864
Location: Singapore
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: Chicago Booth - Class of 2015
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2010, 11:07
Premises :
1. local government initiated an antismoking campaign
2. Imposed tax on cigarettes of 20 cents per pack
3. One year later the number of smokers in the locality declined
4. Antismoking campaign did work on the locality (This is not a premise)

Assumption : Efficacy of the campaign was NOT dependent on tax increase.

If the campaign reduced the cigarette smokers then it was not the tax that deterred the smokers from smoking since the merchants absorbed the tax increase. The campaign did 100%. D just says that. D is correct!

Another way to look at the argument is --- X leads to Y. Anti smoking campaign (X) caused Y (decline in smokers)
Then Z(Tax increase) did not cause Y. Alternate explanation destroys the causal argument.

In Causal Argument X -> Y
Y -> X is prohibited
Z -> Y is prohibited


sridhar wrote:
can u pls explain how it was choice D. I thought option D would have weakened the argument. Reducing the price by 20 cents would have increased smoking. Isn't it?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: Current Student
Joined: 14 Oct 2009
Posts: 368
Schools: Chicago Booth 2013, Ross, Duke , Kellogg , Stanford, Haas
Reviews Badge
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2010, 13:53
gauravnagpal wrote:
Somehow ... I was sure of B ...but you know "its different"


I picked B at first too, but now see why it can't be B. Its because the paragraph says the number of people who smoke decreased by 3%, it says nothing about the amount that they smoked. So even if every single smoker smokes less the actual number of smokers does not decrease unless they quit all together.
_________________

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 229
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2010, 20:37
I had picked B but now I agree with nusmavrik's explanation.
_________________

Trying hard to achieve something unachievable now....

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Jan 2010
Posts: 152
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jul 2010, 00:53
D for me too ................

Only problem with B is it directly counters the evidence........substantial to only 3 % (mearly).....
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 10 Jun 2010
Posts: 15
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jul 2010, 07:23
I agree that D is correct even though I picked B.

It is easy to distract the focus from advertisement to tax imposing action. After all, the arguement focus on the effect of advertisement, not tax. Option D clearly shows that the tax does not affect the anti-smoking campaign to prove that advertisement is helpful.
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1280
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jul 2010, 14:08
good question. Fell for the wrong one....:(

Agree with D.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 51
Schools: LBS, Harvard, Booth, Stanford, ISB, NTU
WE 1: S/W Engineer
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Aug 2010, 11:09
OMG! Fell for B. :(
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 864
Location: Singapore
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: Chicago Booth - Class of 2015
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Aug 2010, 11:49
Yeah B is wrong since it does not affect the number of smokers. It affects the amount of smoking which is really NOT the efficacy. The efficacy of the campaign lies in the total number of non smokers -
Premise : One year later the number of people in the locality who smoke cigarettes had declined by 3 percent. ----> "the number" is the keyword.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 45
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Aug 2010, 16:08
It is a little stricky! I thought it s B at first
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Jan 2010
Posts: 86
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Aug 2010, 08:06
v ery good Q noboru.....it was hard to pick D at first ...but now i can see how D is correct.....

this was like a typical question where gmat tries to puzzle u to pick wrong answer
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
Posts: 49
Location: United States (NY)
Schools: CBS '14 (A)
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Mar 2011, 13:02
I think (D) is still the better answer, although I can see why (B) might be tempting at first.

The gap in the original arguement is that smoking could have been reduced because of the ad campaign or it could have been because of the 20cent tax. (D) effectively nullifies the impact the tax would have had on reducing the percentage of smokers .

Choice (B) still leaves the gap in the arguement intact. In fact, it could even be a direct result of the tax. Therefore Current smokers might have cut back on smoking because the 20cent tax made it too costly OR because of the ad campaign.

I think this is a good, tough question, namely because of the well crafted 'trap' answer
Retired Moderator
avatar
B
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1470
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Mar 2011, 22:14
Answer is D as it eliminates an alternate cause for effect, i.e., increase in price as deterrent, hence the puported cause - advertisement- is the real cause.

B says "smoke less", but not that they've quit, and also "A substantial number" is a vague sounding phrase in this context. We don't know how it correlates with 3% !
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1382
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2011, 14:28
+1 D

The tax didn't make more expensive the cigarretes because the stores reduced the prices.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Posts: 89
Re: One year ago [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Mar 2011, 19:50
Good question..
Fell for B.. :(
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Posts: 362
CAT Tests
Re: One year ago a local government initiated an antismoking [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2017, 00:41
D - clearly despite the price reduction (or the price would have remained the same), cigarette buying didn't increase, but the advertisements created reduced the smoking
Re: One year ago a local government initiated an antismoking   [#permalink] 10 Sep 2017, 00:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by

One year ago a local government initiated an antismoking

  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®.