Quote:
Prior to 1980, many American-made cars did not have anti-lock brakes. These brakes help to prevent cars from skidding and spinning out on ice, and would therefore seem to increase driver control. However, after 1980, when all American-made cars were manufactured with anti-lock brakes, the number of U.S. drivers who experience car accidents due to skidding or spinning out on ice increased by 4 percent annually.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase in the number of drivers who skidded and spun out on ice?
(A) During the winter, the U.S. has an unusually large number of icy roadways.
(B) Cars can be just as likely to skid and spin out just after the beginning of a snowstorm as when roads are covered by patches of ice.
(C) Prior to the introduction of anti-lock brakes in American cars, more drivers skidded and spun out in the U.S. than in any other country.
(D) After 1980, many U.S. drivers who had specifically avoided driving in icy conditions no longer did so.
(E) Many drivers skid and spin out on ice because they fail to steer appropriately rather than because their cars lack anti-lock brakes.
The right answer is
D. The key thing to note about this question is that it is asking us to
resolve the apparent paradox. If cars have anti-lock brakes now, then why is the number of accidents going up? Hence, we are looking to
explain how the number of accidents might have gone up.
A, B, C - None of these refer to anything that could have changed before or after the anti-lock brakes, so none of them work here.
OUTE - This does say that it has something to do with driver skill, and if true, it may explain why skidding is common. BUT,
it only explains why the rate of skidding should be the same. If anti-lock brakes don't have an impact, then it doesn't make sense unless driver skill has dropped off.
Hence,
D is the right answer. It also clearly gives a reason why accidents would increase, that people are putting themselves in the situation much more often.
- Matoo