Last visit was: 11 Sep 2024, 07:22 It is currently 11 Sep 2024, 07:22
Toolkit
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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions

Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 14018
Own Kudos [?]: 38715 [25]
Given Kudos: 5865
GPA: 3.62
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 14018
Own Kudos [?]: 38715 [1]
Given Kudos: 5865
GPA: 3.62
Intern
Joined: 07 Feb 2022
Posts: 23
Own Kudos [?]: 12 [1]
Given Kudos: 166
General Discussion
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 348
Own Kudos [?]: 478 [0]
Given Kudos: 94
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
A) Would help explain, since Brazil > Russia in terms of the % of people going to both the museums
B)Would help explain, since per the data we can see that the per capital
history museums are least for Russia
C) Would not help explain, China is the exception where science is valued but history museum count in not in top 3

Posted from my mobile device
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 14018
Own Kudos [?]: 38715 [5]
Given Kudos: 5865
GPA: 3.62
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
4
Bookmarks
Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions
Country/
political union
Public
library
Zoo/
aquarium
Natural
history
museum
Science/
technology
museum
Russia15852
Brazil252874
European Union35272018
South Korea35373010
China41511319
Japan48452012
US65482726

For each of the following statements select Would help explain if it would, if true, help explain some of the information in the table. Otherwise select Would not help explain.
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 348
Own Kudos [?]: 478 [1]
Given Kudos: 94
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
1
Kudos
A)Yes it would help explain,since the % of people visiting either mueseums in Brazil is greater than that of Russia
B)Yes it would help explain,since percentages of people visiting either mueseums is least in Russia
C)No,since the top 3 is different for natural mueseums and science museum

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Joined: 08 Jul 2017
Posts: 96
Own Kudos [?]: 51 [0]
Given Kudos: 214
GMAT 1: 620 Q48 V29
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
Apt0810 wrote:
A)Yes it would help explain,since the % of people visiting either mueseums in Brazil is greater than that of Russia
B)Yes it would help explain,since percentages of people visiting either mueseums is least in Russia
C)No,since the top 3 is different for natural mueseums and science museum

Posted from my mobile device

but we have no information about the population of each countries. A & B cant be explained from the table. There is definite No for C hence answerable.
Manager
Joined: 16 Aug 2019
Posts: 140
Own Kudos [?]: 96 [1]
Given Kudos: 51
Location: Taiwan
GPA: 3.7
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
1
Kudos
(1) more people/population lives within close proximity/live nearby the museum(A)

------------>>
Brazil 7%/total population > Russia 5%/total population visit history museum
Brazil 4%/total population > Russia 2%/total population visit science museum
more people visit history& science museum(B)

(A) can be a probable reason, though not the only one reason, which lead to the phenomenon(Brazil has more percentage of people visiting museum than Russia) shown in the table(B)

(2) has “fewest” museum per capita(A)

------------>Russia has the fewest percentage of people within its country visiting the history museum(B)

same as (1), (A) can be a probable reason which help to explain (B)

(3) here the question stem assume that,

(1)if the country spend more money to promote history museum, it can attract more people
visit the museum, or say the correlation between these two factors can be possible
(2)if the country value much more to the science, it can attract more people visiting the science museum

South korea/US/European union or Japan are among the top three nations with the highest percentage of people within each country that will visit the history museum

However,
It is that US/China/European union are the top three countries which have the highest percentage of people visiting the science museum

South Korea cannot match to China
Thus the statement in (3) cannot establish/cannot help explain the info in the table
Manager
Joined: 16 Aug 2019
Posts: 140
Own Kudos [?]: 96 [0]
Given Kudos: 51
Location: Taiwan
GPA: 3.7
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
robu1 wrote:
Apt0810 wrote:
A)Yes it would help explain,since the % of people visiting either mueseums in Brazil is greater than that of Russia
B)Yes it would help explain,since percentages of people visiting either mueseums is least in Russia
C)No,since the top 3 is different for natural mueseums and science museum

Posted from my mobile device

but we have no information about the population of each countries. A & B cant be explained from the table. There is definite No for C hence answerable.

hi Apt0810,
its a doubt same as me before , however, after thinking and reading the question stem once again ,I see that the question stem does talks about "percentage"(means it is "percentile"-one hundred unit) rather than "how many people-population quantity", and we could say that it is the "overlapping" that cause some countries such as US had the sum of total percentage(add up library/aquarium/history &science museum) exceed 100%
CEO
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Posts: 2667
Own Kudos [?]: 1930 [1]
Given Kudos: 764
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy and Utilities)
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Project IR Butler 2019-20 - Get one IR Question Everyday
Question # 137, Date : 14-Feb-2020
This post is a part of Project IR Butler 2019-20. Click here for Details

Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions, Single Year.

Attachment:
2.jpg

For each of the following statements select Would help explain if it would, if true, help explain some of the information in the table. Otherwise select Would not help explain.

 Would help explain Would not help explain Statements The proportion of the population of Brazil that lives within close proximity to at least one museum is larger than that of Russia. Of the countries/political unions in the table, Russia has the fewest natural history museums per capita. Of the countries/political unions in the table, the three that spend the most money to promote their natural history museums are also those in which science is most highly valued.

Would help explain, Would help explain and Would not help explain

For the second question, only percentage population visiting the NH museums is given. For Russia, 5% may mean 100 NH museums have by sparse number of people visiting while for US, for example, the number of people visiting out of total is 27%, which can be either 50 or 150 or anything else.
So, factors that would not matter are:
1. Population of the Countries
2. Density of the people visiting the NH museums.
3. Relative number of people visiting NH museums in Russia to any other country.

Factor that would matter:
1. Ration of number of NHMs to population in Russia and ratio of number of NHMs to population in other the countries(off course this is asked).

Because there is no mention of number of NHMs in the table it should be 'Would not help explain'. Don't understand why it is 'Would help explain'.
If it has to be the latter, don't there has be an assumption that Percentage of Population visiting NHMs is positively correlated to number of NHMs and negatively correlated to population of individual countries.??
Intern
Joined: 02 Jun 2020
Posts: 32
Own Kudos [?]: 15 [3]
Given Kudos: 15
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
3
Kudos
+1 Kudos to posts containing answer with explanation

First question : Would explain. Because a larger proportion of the Brazilian population lives within close proximity to at least 1 museum than that of the Russian population, it explains why a larger % of the Brazilian population went to the public library (25%) than that of the Russian population (15%).

Second question : Would explain. Because Russia has the fewest natural history museums per capita, it explains why Russia has the lowest % of its population that went to a Natural History Museum amongst all the countries.

Third : Wouldn't explain. Here, I have a different explanation from that of Apt0810. I think here the information would not explain anything because we don't know anything about the money invested. When the information says : "the three that spend the most money to promote their natural history museums", how do we know what are these countries? This report is about the "percentage of the population visiting cultural institutions", nothing is said about invested money. That is the reasoning I used to answer this question, but if I'm completely off track please let me know !
Intern
Joined: 05 Mar 2021
Posts: 18
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 18
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
I don't understand the answer to number two. One must make a huge assumption about the population of Russia based on the number of visitors their natural history museums receive. What if, for one reason or another, the people of Russia don't have an interest in natural history? There could be an abundance of museums, but they aren't visited often. The number of people visiting a certain institution says very little about the total number of people in a country. In IR, we are never supposed to make assumptions; our answers are supposed to be based strictly on the information presented in the charts. Why is it that this question requires us to make an assumption?
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Aug 2020
Posts: 250
Own Kudos [?]: 161 [0]
Given Kudos: 216
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
unraveled wrote:
Project IR Butler 2019-20 - Get one IR Question Everyday
Question # 137, Date : 14-Feb-2020
This post is a part of Project IR Butler 2019-20. Click here for Details

Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions, Single Year.

Attachment:
2.jpg

For each of the following statements select Would help explain if it would, if true, help explain some of the information in the table. Otherwise select Would not help explain.

 Would help explain Would not help explain Statements The proportion of the population of Brazil that lives within close proximity to at least one museum is larger than that of Russia. Of the countries/political unions in the table, Russia has the fewest natural history museums per capita. Of the countries/political unions in the table, the three that spend the most money to promote their natural history museums are also those in which science is most highly valued.

Would help explain, Would help explain and Would not help explain

For the second question, only percentage population visiting the NH museums is given. For Russia, 5% may mean 100 NH museums have by sparse number of people visiting while for US, for example, the number of people visiting out of total is 27%, which can be either 50 or 150 or anything else.
So, factors that would not matter are:
1. Population of the Countries
2. Density of the people visiting the NH museums.
3. Relative number of people visiting NH museums in Russia to any other country.

Factor that would matter:
1. Ration of number of NHMs to population in Russia and ratio of number of NHMs to population in other the countries(off course this is asked).

Because there is no mention of number of NHMs in the table it should be 'Would not help explain'. Don't understand why it is 'Would help explain'.
If it has to be the latter, don't there has be an assumption that Percentage of Population visiting NHMs is positively correlated to number of NHMs and negatively correlated to population of individual countries.??

Dear Karishma, the master of CR, could you shed some light on the validity of reasoning on 2nd question:
Of the countries/political unions in the table, Russia has the fewest natural history museums per capita.

I am also bewildered how we can come up to such latent assumption that follows from the Official explanation provided by Sajjad1994?
If Russia has the smallest percent of visitors of NH museum does it imply that the number of museum per capita also the lowest? How we can compare percent and numbers? Or how we can straight infer that the low % of visitors is because there is low number of museum in lieu of simple unwillingness of residents to visit the museum?

For instance
100 museum/100 residents and only 5% = 5 visitors. = 1mus/capita
Or
200 museum/100 residents and only 5% = 5 visitors = 2mus/capita

Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15297
Own Kudos [?]: 67976 [2]
Given Kudos: 442
Location: Pune, India
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
2
Kudos
BLTN wrote:
unraveled wrote:
Project IR Butler 2019-20 - Get one IR Question Everyday
Question # 137, Date : 14-Feb-2020
This post is a part of Project IR Butler 2019-20. Click here for Details

Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions, Single Year.

Attachment:
2.jpg

For each of the following statements select Would help explain if it would, if true, help explain some of the information in the table. Otherwise select Would not help explain.

 Would help explain Would not help explain Statements The proportion of the population of Brazil that lives within close proximity to at least one museum is larger than that of Russia. Of the countries/political unions in the table, Russia has the fewest natural history museums per capita. Of the countries/political unions in the table, the three that spend the most money to promote their natural history museums are also those in which science is most highly valued.

Would help explain, Would help explain and Would not help explain

For the second question, only percentage population visiting the NH museums is given. For Russia, 5% may mean 100 NH museums have by sparse number of people visiting while for US, for example, the number of people visiting out of total is 27%, which can be either 50 or 150 or anything else.
So, factors that would not matter are:
1. Population of the Countries
2. Density of the people visiting the NH museums.
3. Relative number of people visiting NH museums in Russia to any other country.

Factor that would matter:
1. Ration of number of NHMs to population in Russia and ratio of number of NHMs to population in other the countries(off course this is asked).

Because there is no mention of number of NHMs in the table it should be 'Would not help explain'. Don't understand why it is 'Would help explain'.
If it has to be the latter, don't there has be an assumption that Percentage of Population visiting NHMs is positively correlated to number of NHMs and negatively correlated to population of individual countries.??

Dear Karishma, the master of CR, could you shed some light on the validity of reasoning on 2nd question:
Of the countries/political unions in the table, Russia has the fewest natural history museums per capita.

I am also bewildered how we can come up to such latent assumption that follows from the Official explanation provided by Sajjad1994?
If Russia has the smallest percent of visitors of NH museum does it imply that the number of museum per capita also the lowest? How we can compare percent and numbers? Or how we can straight infer that the low % of visitors is because there is low number of museum in lieu of simple unwillingness of residents to visit the museum?

For instance
100 museum/100 residents and only 5% = 5 visitors. = 1mus/capita
Or
200 museum/100 residents and only 5% = 5 visitors = 2mus/capita

Think of a country that has no natural history museum. How many people there would visit? 0%
Now think of a country that has 1 natural history museum. How many people would visit it? The ones who are staying close by. The others living in other cities may not be able to normally even if the intent is there.
Note that we are talking about large public places. A city with a population of many thousands would normally have 1 or 2 or 5 of these museums. Not 10000 or 20000 etc.
It is not a question of 1 museum per capita or 2 museums per capita. It is more like 1 museum per 100 thousand people. If one is not available in your proximity, you may not be able to visit it even if you want to.

Hence the low numbers of Russia would be explained if we knew that Russia has the fewest museums per capita.
Intern
Joined: 03 Apr 2014
Posts: 3
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 128
Location: United States (IL)
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
I have the same question... Sweeping Assumptions are required to answer these questions correctly.

kaylaquijas wrote:
I don't understand the answer to number two. One must make a huge assumption about the population of Russia based on the number of visitors their natural history museums receive. What if, for one reason or another, the people of Russia don't have an interest in natural history? There could be an abundance of museums, but they aren't visited often. The number of people visiting a certain institution says very little about the total number of people in a country. In IR, we are never supposed to make assumptions; our answers are supposed to be based strictly on the information presented in the charts. Why is it that this question requires us to make an assumption?
Intern
Joined: 14 Dec 2019
Posts: 25
Own Kudos [?]: 16 [0]
Given Kudos: 39
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
Official Explanation

Evaluate: This question tests the ability to make judgments about the plausibility of several statements as possible explanations for aspects of the data in the table.

RO1: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because, on average, people living closer to museums are also more likely to visit museums. Sorting on Natural history museum shows that, for the two museum categories (natural history and science/technology), a greater percentage of Brazil’s population than of Russia’s visits in a single year. Therefore, if, on average, Brazil’s population lives closer than Russia’s to museums, it could help explain information in the table.

The correct answer is Would help explain.

RO2: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because, among the countries/political unions listed in the table, the lowest average number of institutions per capita is associated with the lowest proportion of the population visiting such institutions. Sorting the table by Natural history museum shows that, among the countries/political unions shown, Russia has the smallest proportion of its population visiting natural history museums in a single year.

The correct answer is Would help explain.

RO3: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because the countries/political unions in which people are most likely to visit natural history museums are also those in which people are most likely to visit science/technology museums. However, sorting the table by Natural history museum and Science/technology museum shows that the country/political union with the fifth highest proportion of the population visiting natural history museums (China) has the second highest proportion visiting science/technology museums, a proportion that is higher than that of the countries/political unions with the first (US), third (European Union), and fourth (Japan) highest proportions in the natural history category.

The correct answer is Would not help explain.

Attachment:
1.jpg
Attachment:
2.jpg
Attachment:
3.jpg

I am confused with first two answers
RO1
As per capita population visit to museum does not define the they live near to it, may be that country peoples like more to visit cultural museums and other country peoples doesn't.

RO2
Visiting per capita population doesn't means that they have more or less number of that institutions ie more popular institutions have more visit, also marketing and other factors may also involve

Posted from my mobile device
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15297
Own Kudos [?]: 67976 [2]
Given Kudos: 442
Location: Pune, India
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
2
Kudos
UmangMe wrote:
Official Explanation

Evaluate: This question tests the ability to make judgments about the plausibility of several statements as possible explanations for aspects of the data in the table.

RO1: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because, on average, people living closer to museums are also more likely to visit museums. Sorting on Natural history museum shows that, for the two museum categories (natural history and science/technology), a greater percentage of Brazil’s population than of Russia’s visits in a single year. Therefore, if, on average, Brazil’s population lives closer than Russia’s to museums, it could help explain information in the table.

The correct answer is Would help explain.

RO2: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because, among the countries/political unions listed in the table, the lowest average number of institutions per capita is associated with the lowest proportion of the population visiting such institutions. Sorting the table by Natural history museum shows that, among the countries/political unions shown, Russia has the smallest proportion of its population visiting natural history museums in a single year.

The correct answer is Would help explain.

RO3: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because the countries/political unions in which people are most likely to visit natural history museums are also those in which people are most likely to visit science/technology museums. However, sorting the table by Natural history museum and Science/technology museum shows that the country/political union with the fifth highest proportion of the population visiting natural history museums (China) has the second highest proportion visiting science/technology museums, a proportion that is higher than that of the countries/political unions with the first (US), third (European Union), and fourth (Japan) highest proportions in the natural history category.

The correct answer is Would not help explain.

Attachment:
1.jpg
Attachment:
2.jpg
Attachment:
3.jpg

I am confused with first two answers
RO1
As per capita population visit to museum does not define the they live near to it, may be that country peoples like more to visit cultural museums and other country peoples doesn't.

RO2
Visiting per capita population doesn't means that they have more or less number of that institutions ie more popular institutions have more visit, also marketing and other factors may also involve

Posted from my mobile device

Note that we are not looking for inferences. The question is "which option would help explain some of the information" i.e. if the option is true, it would help to explain why the data varies in the countries. It doesn't mean that this is why the data varies. It means that this could be a reason why it varies. The reason could be something else also but this is also a possible reason.

If you know that people in Brazil live closer to museums, you could argue that that is why more of them visit. It could explain the figures. Another way to explain the figures could be that people in Brazil are more fond of visiting museums. This could also explain if it were available as one of the options in our question.
Intern
Joined: 18 Dec 2018
Posts: 14
Own Kudos [?]: 6 [0]
Given Kudos: 366
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
KarishmaB MartyMurray any general advise on how to deal with such questions, I was baffled with the lack of any insights related to the table, it seems as if the answers can be explained or not are open to interpretation here. However, I know that is not the case. Please explain the logic on how to approach such questions.

KarishmaB wrote:
UmangMe wrote:
Official Explanation

Evaluate: This question tests the ability to make judgments about the plausibility of several statements as possible explanations for aspects of the data in the table.

RO1: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because, on average, people living closer to museums are also more likely to visit museums. Sorting on Natural history museum shows that, for the two museum categories (natural history and science/technology), a greater percentage of Brazil’s population than of Russia’s visits in a single year. Therefore, if, on average, Brazil’s population lives closer than Russia’s to museums, it could help explain information in the table.

The correct answer is Would help explain.

RO2: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because, among the countries/political unions listed in the table, the lowest average number of institutions per capita is associated with the lowest proportion of the population visiting such institutions. Sorting the table by Natural history museum shows that, among the countries/political unions shown, Russia has the smallest proportion of its population visiting natural history museums in a single year.

The correct answer is Would help explain.

RO3: Evaluate

If this statement is to be explanatory, it would likely be because the countries/political unions in which people are most likely to visit natural history museums are also those in which people are most likely to visit science/technology museums. However, sorting the table by Natural history museum and Science/technology museum shows that the country/political union with the fifth highest proportion of the population visiting natural history museums (China) has the second highest proportion visiting science/technology museums, a proportion that is higher than that of the countries/political unions with the first (US), third (European Union), and fourth (Japan) highest proportions in the natural history category.

The correct answer is Would not help explain.

Attachment:
1.jpg
Attachment:
2.jpg
Attachment:
3.jpg

I am confused with first two answers
RO1
As per capita population visit to museum does not define the they live near to it, may be that country peoples like more to visit cultural museums and other country peoples doesn't.

RO2
Visiting per capita population doesn't means that they have more or less number of that institutions ie more popular institutions have more visit, also marketing and other factors may also involve

Posted from my mobile device

Note that we are not looking for inferences. The question is "which option would help explain some of the information" i.e. if the option is true, it would help to explain why the data varies in the countries. It doesn't mean that this is why the data varies. It means that this could be a reason why it varies. The reason could be something else also but this is also a possible reason.

If you know that people in Brazil live closer to museums, you could argue that that is why more of them visit. It could explain the figures. Another way to explain the figures could be that people in Brazil are more fond of visiting museums. This could also explain if it were available as one of the options in our question.
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 15297
Own Kudos [?]: 67976 [2]
Given Kudos: 442
Location: Pune, India
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
2
Kudos
KarishmaB MartyMurray any general advise on how to deal with such questions, I was baffled with the lack of any insights related to the table, it seems as if the answers can be explained or not are open to interpretation here. However, I know that is not the case. Please explain the logic on how to approach such questions.

Yes, you are right that the answers are not open to interpretation.

Let me re-iterate something I wrote above:
Note that we are NOT looking for inferences. The question is "which option would help explain some of the information" i.e. if the option is true, it would help to explain why the data varies in the countries. It doesn't mean that this is why the data varies. It means that this could be a reason why it varies. The reason could be something else also but this is also a possible reason.

If you know that people in Brazil live closer to museums, you could argue that that is why more of them visit. It could explain the figures. Another way to explain the figures could be that people in Brazil are more fond of visiting museums. This could also explain if it were available as one of the options in our question.

The given statements should be taken to be TRUE. Now that you know that 'the proportion of the population of Brazil that lives within close proximity to at least one museum is larger than that of Russia,' does the data in the table make more sense?
Well, the data in the table shows that in Russia, 5% and 2% of the population visits the two types of museums.
The table also shows that in Brazil, 7% and 4% of the population visits the two types of museums.

If I know that a higher percentage of the population of Brazil lives close to museums, it COULD EXPLAIN why the numbers are higher for Brazil. Hence I choose 'would help explain' here.
Follow the same logic for the other two statements too. They are given to you as facts. Now see whether they help you make sense of the data in the table. Do they help explain why some data in the table is what it is?
Intern
Joined: 29 Jan 2024
Posts: 10
Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Re: Percentage of Population Visiting Selected Cultural Institutions [#permalink]
Hey, I have a question.
In the new GMAT Focus Official Starter tool kits practice questions, there is an additional statement:

"Science and technology museums are less popular than other cultural institutions in the majority of the countries/political unions in the table."

I choose "would not help explain" but the correct answer is "would help explain".
My question is that I think this statement is just describing information in the table and does not explain information in the table. Therefore, I don't think this statement would help explain.