|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
05 Dec 2013, 15:28
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared in the editorial section of a West Cambria newspaper.
“A recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria. In order to provide better patient care for accident victims and to raise revenue for our town by collecting service fees for ambulance use, we should disband our volunteer service and hire a commercial ambulance service.”
The editorial above is concerned with the need for the switch from the volunteer ambulance service to the commercial ambulance service to provide medical care of a higher quality. The underlying assumption of this argument is that the short response time to accidents determines better patient treatment by the ambulance service. Yet such a premise is seriously flawed and unjustified, resulting in a mistaken conclusion in the end of the paragraph.
Firstly, in the argument the causality between the length of response time and the quality of medical services provided is not proved. The shorter response time could mean the use of more modern ambulance cars by the commercial service. Alternatively, there could be fewer accidents in East Cambria, which leads to a more quickly response of the town’s ambulance squad. The author also fails to outline the possible determinants of the quality of medical care such as the medical equipment in use or tenure of the ambulance employees.
Secondly, the incentive to increase the town’s budget by making citizens pay for the ambulance service seems ill-grounded. There is no evidence favouritizing the patient’s desire to switch to a private ambulance service. In addition, it is unclear whether people would be willing to pay for the ambulance services at all. Therefore, the idea that hiring a privatized ambulance services provider would lead to an increase in municipal revenues is erroneously flawed.
Finally, it is not demonstrated that better patient care is provided specifically by the commercial ambulance or that the volunteer service is less professional. The author’s conclusion could have been more solid if there was some statistical evidence on the patients’ satisfaction with the services provided by both private and public ambulances. This would give more room for advocating the decision on employing the commercial ambulance service.
To sum up, weak logics and poor argumentation make this argument non-valid. It could have been strengthened by providing the survey results on the patients’ satisfaction with the quality of ambulance services. The idea about the possible increase in municipality’s budget looks redundant, so it would be reasonable to get rid of it. Moreover, the services provided by the two ambulance squads should be analyzed in parallel in order to get an objective assessment of their performance.
“A recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria. In order to provide better patient care for accident victims and to raise revenue for our town by collecting service fees for ambulance use, we should disband our volunteer service and hire a commercial ambulance service.”
The editorial above is concerned with the need for the switch from the volunteer ambulance service to the commercial ambulance service to provide medical care of a higher quality. The underlying assumption of this argument is that the short response time to accidents determines better patient treatment by the ambulance service. Yet such a premise is seriously flawed and unjustified, resulting in a mistaken conclusion in the end of the paragraph.
Firstly, in the argument the causality between the length of response time and the quality of medical services provided is not proved. The shorter response time could mean the use of more modern ambulance cars by the commercial service. Alternatively, there could be fewer accidents in East Cambria, which leads to a more quickly response of the town’s ambulance squad. The author also fails to outline the possible determinants of the quality of medical care such as the medical equipment in use or tenure of the ambulance employees.
Secondly, the incentive to increase the town’s budget by making citizens pay for the ambulance service seems ill-grounded. There is no evidence favouritizing the patient’s desire to switch to a private ambulance service. In addition, it is unclear whether people would be willing to pay for the ambulance services at all. Therefore, the idea that hiring a privatized ambulance services provider would lead to an increase in municipal revenues is erroneously flawed.
Finally, it is not demonstrated that better patient care is provided specifically by the commercial ambulance or that the volunteer service is less professional. The author’s conclusion could have been more solid if there was some statistical evidence on the patients’ satisfaction with the services provided by both private and public ambulances. This would give more room for advocating the decision on employing the commercial ambulance service.
To sum up, weak logics and poor argumentation make this argument non-valid. It could have been strengthened by providing the survey results on the patients’ satisfaction with the quality of ambulance services. The idea about the possible increase in municipality’s budget looks redundant, so it would be reasonable to get rid of it. Moreover, the services provided by the two ambulance squads should be analyzed in parallel in order to get an objective assessment of their performance.
Moderators:
188 posts
