Airline Representative: The percentage of flight delays caused by airl

Hello, everyone. I think the phrasing of the question itself might be throwing some people off, although I will agree that this is, in fact, a difficult question (the type I used to miss with about the same probability as a fair coin landing on heads or tails). I will provide a full assessment of each answer choice in an effort to assist the community. But first, the question:


This question type is often phrased, The argument is most vulnerable to the criticism... and I think that the more familiar phrasing alone would increase answer accuracy. Logical flaw is more LSAT-ish, and instead of orienting ourselves mentally to expose a weakness in the reasoning of the argument, we latch onto logical flaw and look for any such flaw, however we may interpret the term, to answer the question. Anyway, that is just my theory. How about we break down the passage to tease out some talking points?



- Sentence 1 provides a premise for the argument. The percentage of flight delays attributed to airline error decreased significantly from the previous year. Note that percentage should not be conflated with number, a trap that often snares test-takers in Quant.

- Sentence 2 gives us an intermediate conclusion. You can almost picture a because ahead of sentence 1, with an appropriate alteration of a period for a comma at the end of that sentence. That is, because of the reduction in the percentage of flight delays caused by airline error, the Airline Representative takes this as a sign that airlines have addressed the problems brought up in complaints, specifically those about preventable errors.

- Sentence 3 starts with a concession—although in this sense is similar to saying despite or even though—and we see two absolutes in uncontrollable factors and always be part of travel. So, even though these factors exist, the main conclusion is that preventable delays are clearly decreasing.

To expose the flaw in reasoning, we need to find a compelling counterpoint to this apparently obvious conclusion, namely that preventable delays may not be decreasing.


What an attractive distraction, I must admit. The big problem with this answer choice, in my mind, is that who is to say that airlines had not been motivated before to underreport the percentage of flight delays caused by airline error? Are we then to suppose that the airlines may have covered up a bit more from the previous year? Besides, we have no hard numbers in hand, just a decline in the percentage of airline-error-induced delays. We are now two steps removed from a clear and direct answer. We need to keep looking. Red light.


Another attractive option, this one has us focus on a possible reason behind consumer complaints. The trap is to think that if customers were increasing their complaints about delays caused by uncontrollable factors, then that percentage of complaints would necessarily increase relative to the percentage of complaints lodged because of delays caused by controllable factors such as airline error. The argument of the Airline Representative, however, is based on airlines addressing preventable errors, so even if the complaints about uncontrollable errors are up, it could still be true that airlines have addressed the issues related to preventable delays. Complaints about delays and delays themselves are two separate entities. If you wanted to hang on to this choice for the time being, that is fine, as it seems better than (A), and you can and should weigh the merits of one answer against another as you go to thin the pool of potentials. Yellow light.


Finally, an easy answer to see off. We do not care about the most reliable indicator of errors. The fact that the Airline Representative has singled out preventable delays, those that are caused by airline error, makes that a relevant matter, end of story. Red light.


I sometimes talk about how GMAC™ likes to bend over backwards to make the correct answer stand out via the use of modifiers. (See, for example, this other tough CR question from the OG 2021 and my accompanying comment.) Here, such delays have not just increased, but increased dramatically, and, moreover, you can be absolutely certain that this increase occurred at a time that would affect the argument: during the year under discussion. You can use numbers if you prefer—how would you quantify a dramatic increase? more than 50 percent? 75 percent?—or you can stick to words, but if the number of delays caused by weather and other uncontrollable factors increased significantly, then it is easier to appreciate how the percentage of flight delays caused by airline error could have dropped without the actual number of such delays decreasing, and the conclusion is counting numbers, not percentages: preventable delays are clearly decreasing. If you were on the fence between this answer and (B), I would hope that you could now see what makes this one much more compelling. GMAC™ has shouldered the burden for you and tossed you these over-the-top modifiers. Count yourself lucky! Green light.


Like (C), this one derails pretty quickly. We are not concerned with what airline customers believe. In any case, if they did believe that airline error, rather than mysterious uncontrollable factors, had caused delays, that still has nothing to do with the established fact, the basis for the argument, that the percentage of flight delays caused by airline error decreased significantly this year. (You might even anticipate that more people would have complained about the airlines.) Red light.

I say this often to my students, and I observe it as closely as I can myself: make every word count in an answer choice. Stick to what the passage says, and if you narrow the choices down to a 50/50 proposition, look to attack anything in either option. The one that is easier to fight against is the one you should toss aside.

I hope that helps. Good luck with your studies, and watch those modifiers.

- Andrew

The % of flight delays caused by airline error decreased significantly this year (say airline error decreased from 25% to 15%)
This indicates that airlines listened to complaints about preventable errors and addressed the problems.
Although delays caused by weather and other uncontrollable factors will always be part of travel, preventable delays are clearly decreasing

We know that % of airline errors has decreased. So previously if 25% delay were caused by airline errors and 75% delays by uncontrollable factors, now only 15% were caused by airline errors and 85% by uncontrollable factors.

So the airline rep is concluding that the airlines have addressed complaints and decreased preventable delays.
What is the flaw in this reasoning? What if the airlines have addressed nothing and done nothing to decrease preventable delays and this lower percentage is just an impact of an increase in the number of uncontrollable errors?

Say, previously there were 75 uncontrollable errors and 25 airline errors. Now what if airline errors are still 25 but uncontrollable errors are 140? The percentage of airline errors in this case would have gone down to 15%.

This is what option (D) says and is the correct option.

A. Airlines may be motivated by financial concerns to underreport the percentage of flight delays caused by airline error.

Irrelevant. We are given that % of airline errors has reduced from previous year and that is the only data point being used in the argument. Whether the actual number of airline errors/uncontrollable errors was/is accurate is not the point.

B. The delays caused by uncontrollable factors could have led to an increase in complaints to airlines.

Number of complaints is irrelevant.

C. Complaints may not be the most reliable measure of how many errors occurred in a given year.

Irrelevant. We don't how how errors are measured.

E. Airline customers might not believe that particular delays were caused by uncontrollable factors rather than airline error.

Irrelevant what customers believe.

Answer (D)

The Airline rep says that-

The percentage of flight delays caused by airline errors decreased significantly this year.
This indicates that airlines listened to complaints about preventable errors and addressed the problems
Although delays caused by weather and other uncontrollable factors will always be part of travel,
preventable delays are clearly decreasing- Opinion/ conclusion

We need to find an option that points to a logical flaw in the representative's reasoning.

A. Airlines may be motivated by financial concerns to underreport the percentage of flight delays caused by airline error.

Financial concerns are out of the scope of the argument. It does not point to a flaw in the representative’s reasoning. Eliminate.

B. The delays caused by uncontrollable factors could have led to an increase in complaints to airlines.

delays caused by uncontrollable factors could have led to an increase in complaints to airlines- Talks about the increase in overall complaints.
We still don’t know the proportion of such delays and complaints.
Remember, the airline representative is arguing that preventable delays are clearly decreasing because the percentage of flight delays caused by airline error decreased significantly this year.
Eliminate.

C. Complaints may not be the most reliable measure of how many errors occurred in a given year.
Out of scope. Eliminate.


D. Delays caused by weather and other uncontrollable factors could have increased dramatically during the year under discussion.

Correct. D addresses the problem that option B fails to address.

Delays caused by weather and other uncontrollable factors could have increased dramatically during the year under discussion.

Delays caused by-
preventable factors- X
weather and other uncontrollable factors-Y

The airline representative is arguing that preventable delays are clearly decreasing because- the percentage of X has significantly decreased this year.
Option D says that Y increased dramatically this year. This could have been the reason why the percentage of X has decreased significantly this year.

E. Airline customers might not believe that particular delays were caused by uncontrollable factors rather than airline error.
We don’t have to bother about what customers believe. Eliminate.


Vishnupriya
GMAT Verbal SME

Although I faltered in this question, here is my post attempt analysis.
AR believes that even though weather and uncontrollable factors cause delays airline has been able to decrease preventable delays by listening to complaints about preventable errors.

As questions stem asks for a logical flaw(weakener) in the AR's argument, we are looking for an alternative reasoning that helps explain the decrease, eventually finding a flaw.
A - Looks intimidating however it strengthens the argument since it helps explain why AR says the there is a decrease in the preventable delays.
B - This one surely points towards a flaw. If uncontrollable factors increased the delays then surely the percentage of preventable errors would decrease.
C - Not concerned of reliability here. Irrelevant.
D - Just like B, this options also highlights a flaw weakening AR's argument. But its different from B in that it specifically says the increase was dramatic for the year under discussion, pointing towards a possible cover-up by airline in saying that airlines listened to complaints about preventable errors and addressed the problems.
E - Irrelevant. What customers believe does not impact AR's argument.

B nowhere explains about why percentage of flight delays caused by airline error decreased significantly this year. So, its not specific about pointing a flaw to weaken the argument.
So, subtle..

Hence D is CORRECT.

Simple explanation:

2019 --> 2020
Human error 50 --> 70
External factor 50 --> 500
Total 100 --> 570

Here, even though percentage of delays due to human error has decreased from 50% to 12%, in absolute terms it has increased by 20 cases. But this is only possible if the number of external cases have considerably increased i.e. by 450 cases as given in example above. Hence, answer is D

Indeed its really a hard question that I cannot even find the relationship between the elements in this argument at first

argument:
because
listen complaints about “preventable errors” …..cause
---> percentage of airline/controllable/preventable errors(notice these three are same)decrease …..effect

although
delay can also caused by “weather and other uncontrollable factors”, or say, “uncontrollable errors” can also be the cause
of delay, and we conclude that preventable delay decrease

to summarize the argument briefly in one sentence:
rather than saying that we control the “uncontrollable errors” to reduce delay, its the reduction of “controllable errors by more complaint listening” that lead to the decrease in preventable delay




I’m not sure whether my logic is correct or not, I just try to illustrate as below

here is the flaw point:
will the percentage of preventable errors (in quantity) decrease by listening to more of its complaint really guarantee the decrease in preventable delay?

listen to complaints about preventable errors
---> percentage of airline errors decrease
---> preventable delay go down

I thought the logic flaw is in here, since
listen more to complaints about preventable errors
must lead to ---> the number of preventable errors go down
---> but “the number of preventable errors go down” cannot guarantee “the percentage of airline/preventable error go down” and further the decrease in preventable delay

take for example:

year1 controllable errors number : 50 percentage : 50%
uncontrollable errors number : 50 percentage : 50%

year2 controllable errors number : 30 percentage : 37.5%
uncontrollable errors number : 50 percentage : 62.5%



maybe has causes, such as uncontrollable factors, other than “listen more to complaints about preventable errors and its percentage of airline errors go down” which lead to the decrease in preventable delay

(D) fill this gap by saying the number of “uncontrollable errors” rise dramatically(thus its percentage will also go up), this will definitely lower the percentage of airline error as well the number of preventable delays, that is, the percentage of preventable errors airline can control go down

as to present this concept, refer to lnm87 ‘s explanation

Let's say there were a total of 100 errors - 40 weather, 40 uncontrollable and 20 airline errors. Next year, let's say the error become 200 in which weather is now 100, uncontrollable errors are 80 and airline errors are 20. Clearly, the percentage of last year was 20 and that of present year 10% - a 50% drop from that of previous year.

VeritasKarishma, thanks for your response.
with the same reasoning, I had opted for D.
Tho, I'm not able to fully grap how B is irrelevant.
I assumed that if the complaints increased then the actuals also must've increased. which makes B the same as D. the only diff I could spot between B and D was that D talks about the current year. Is that the correct reason to opt for D over B?

The number of complaints is irrelevant. The argument only talks about number of delays. The complaints are at the discretion of the passengers or whatever other agency. Do they complain at every delay, we don't know. Does every one complain or do some people choose to complain, we don't know. We just know that complaints happen. How many, how often, by whom etc we don't know.

Hi,

Can someone explain why A is incorrect? It clearly states that the AR attributed the decrease in % delays to action taken by airlines. The option states that an alternate reason could be incorrect classification of delays as uncontrollable errors to reduce costs. I agree that D is a logical flaw too. Am I Interpreting logical flaw wrong?

Posted from my mobile device

Take a look at the explanation of (A) in this post -- if airlines are fudging the numbers, it's likely that they have done so all along and there's no indication that "this year" would be any different than previous years.

Let us know whether that clears things up!

Got it wrong, "clearly" in the question make me confuse

Absolutely stunning qn!
No shame if you get it wrong - I did.
but, if you actually got this in the exam & you got it right, you are looking at a damn good score

From Manhattan:

Step 1: Identify the Question
The phrasing logical flaw in the question stem indicates that this question is either a Find the Flaw question or a Weaken the Argument question. Both are Assumption Family questions and both involve pointing out holes or failings in the argument. However, Weaken questions will include the language if true to indicate that new information is given. Because this problem does not include if true, you will be pointing out a flaw in the argument’s logic.


Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument
Air Rep:
% of delays due to error ↓

Ⓒ airlines listen/fix preventable → preventable delays ↓

Note that this argument is trying to determine causation. The airline representative sees that the percentage of delays due to airline error has decreased. He concludes that the cause must be that the airline is making changes that have reduced the number of preventable delays.


Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
On Flaw questions, the correct answer will essentially be the opposite of those for Find the Assumption problems. Here, the goal is to identify a valid criticism of the argument or a flawed assumption that the argument is making. In this case, the question asks for a criticism of the connection between percent of delays and the airline working to reduce the number of delays.


Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right
(A) Flaw questions are focusing on the logical connections between the facts and claims in a passage. The flaw will not call into question the validity of a given fact. The airline representative’s motivation might result in an incorrect report for the percentage of flight delays, but it doesn’t impact the connection between the percent of flight delays decreasing and the conclusion that the number of preventable delays are decreasing.

(B) The argument does mention that the airline was listening to complaints. However, the number of complaints and whether they were increasing was never discussed or relied upon.

(C) The argument never mentions how the errors are measured. Therefore the argument does not rely on methodology.

(D) CORRECT. If delays caused by weather and other uncontrollable factors increased dramatically, then that could explain why the percentage of flight delays caused by airline error decreased significantly. For example, if there were 100 delays last year, and 20% were caused by airline errors, then 20 were caused by error and 80 by uncontrollable factors. If this year, there were still 20 delays caused by error, but the number of uncontrollable delays increased dramatically to 180, then the new percentage of delays caused by airline errors would be 20 of the 200 total, or 10%. In this scenario, an increase in uncontrollable delays would make the same number of preventable delays appear as a lower percentage of the total, both invalidating that the number of preventable delays decreased and making it less likely that the airline took action to address such delays.

(E) The argument doesn’t depend on whether customers knew the causes of the delays.

Hi AndrewN

How do we know that conclusion is ; "preventable delays are clearly decreasing."?

TBH ı though that conclusion was "This indicates that airlines listened to complaints about preventable errors and addressed the problems." as GMAC sometimes loves to embed their conclusion in the middle or beginning. Also "this indicates" fooled me to think so

Good question, gloomybison. You may have noticed in my earlier post above that I referred to the second sentence as an intermediate conclusion. Why? Because it is clear that this indicates that is an interpretation of information, rather than an established fact. But you have to then ask yourself, why does the passage go on? Is there another opinion to be found? Check the passage.


Who thinks preventable delays are clearly decreasing? The airline representative. If you are wondering about will always be in the last sentence, I would call it an assumption, rather than an opinion. So, what we have are two clearly identifiable parts of the passage that present the opinions or views of the airline representative. And since the second one logically follows from the first (and will not work the other way around), we can reasonably call the conclusion the second one.

I would not worry too much about labeling everything in a given passage, even in a boldface question. The goal is simply to appreciate the logical progression of ideas and answer the question that is being asked.

Thank you for thinking to ask. Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

Sorry the explanations for why B is incorrect (which i picked) are wrong. B and D are saying the same thing. The only difference is when they happen and that matters. Options D says during the year and this matters. While Options B says led to. It is talking about the initial increase in complaints when measured at the beginning of the year.

I got this question wrong but after 20 mins, I now understand why I missed this question.

It basically says, the % has decreased, so the numbers also decreased. Is that always true? Let's see
Year 1 Accidents are decreased by 10% (let's say out of 1000) so 10% = 100
Year 2 Accidents are decreased by 50% (let's say out of 10,000) so 50% = 500
In other words, a reduction in percentage does not neccessarily translate into a reduction in count number. % could decrease while numbers increase.

What the representitive concluded?
"Airline Representative: The percentage of flight delays caused by airline error decreased significantly this year. .....preventable delays are clearly decreasing."

% decreased, so numbers must have decreased