The attached graph displays the labor force participation rate (as a

Question

https://gmatclub.com/forum/download/file.php?mode=view&id=60452 The attached graph displays the labor force participation rate (as a percentage of working-age citizens) for South Dakota and for the United States for the years 2002-2008. Based on the graph, please answer the questions that follow. 1. Which of the following conclusions can be logically drawn from the graph above? 6.jpg

rocky620 · Answer

Which of the following conclusions can be logically drawn from the graph above?

In 2007, the labor force participation rate was twice as high for South Dakota as for the United States as a whole..... Cannot Be Concluded  
Labor force participation rate in 2007, of:
South Dakota ~ 73.5%
United States ~ 66%

The difference is only 7.5%

More South Dakotans were members of the labor force in 2007 than in 2006..... Cannot Be Concluded  
Since the data represents percentages and not the absolute values it cannot be concluded.

For the years 2002 through 2008, South Dakota had a higher labor force participation rate than did the United States...... Can Be Concluded  
Labor force participation rate from 2002-2008, of:
South Dakota is always greater than 72%
United States is always below 61.5%

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

The first conclusion cannot be drawn, as while the relative heights of the bars may look like one is twice as large as the other, the scale at the left-hand side of the graph should show that it is a much more modest difference than double (75% vs. 65%).

The second conclusion cannot be drawn, as given a percentage/rate but no link to actual numbers we cannot draw an inference about actual numbers (suppose the state's population changed dramatically from one year to the next, the slight difference in percentage would be overwhelmed by the dramatic difference in overall number).

The third conclusion, however, is valid, as the graph clearly depicts labor force participation, the specific language of the question.

Answer: Cannot be concluded, Cannot be concluded and Can be concluded

RaahiK · Answer

Why is the first statement marked “cannot be concluded”? The graph shows about 74% for South Dakota and 66% for the U.S. in 2007. Since 74% is clearly not twice 66%, can’t we conclude that the statement is false? 
If we can conclude that the difference is not twice, that's concluding, right??

Bunuel · Answer

“Can be concluded” here means  can this statement itself be concluded  to be true  from the graph?
 
We can determine that the statement is false, since 74% is not twice 66%. Therefore, the statement  cannot be concluded  from the graph.

So yes, we can conclude that it is false, but that is exactly why it belongs under “Cannot be concluded.”

egmat · Answer

Hi RaahiK,

I love this question, because you've spotted something real: you're totally right that the graph lets you  disprove  Statement 1. In 2007 South Dakota reads about  73.7%  and the U.S. reads about  66% , and twice  66%  would be  132%  - impossible, and nowhere near what the bars show. So yes, you can tell the statement is  false .

Here's the subtle part. The prompt isn't asking "can you evaluate this statement?" It's asking " can this statement be concluded  (drawn as a valid conclusion) from the graph?" In other words:  is this a true conclusion the graph supports?

-  "Can be concluded"  = the statement is  true and supported  by the data.
-  "Cannot be concluded"  = the statement is  not  something the graph supports - because it's either  false  or  unknowable .

Statement 1 is false, so it is  not  a conclusion you can draw from the graph -  Cannot be concluded . You proved it's not twice - and that proof is exactly  why  it fails the "can be concluded" test, not a reason to pass it.

The trap in one line

Disproving a statement doesn't make it a valid conclusion. "Cannot be concluded" is the correct bucket for  both  "the graph shows this is false" (Statement 1) and "the graph can't tell us" (Statement 2). Only a statement the graph shows to be  true  - like Statement 3 - earns "Can be concluded."

Quick rehearsal:  Suppose a chart shows a bar at  40  and another at  30 .
- Claim A: "The first is  double  the second." - Graph shows it's not -  Cannot be concluded  (false).
- Claim B: "The first is  larger  than the second." - Graph shows it is -  Can be concluded  (true).

Same data, but only the true claim can be "concluded." That's the distinction Statement 1 is testing.

Answer: Statement 1: Cannot be concluded; Statement 2: Cannot be concluded; Statement 3: Can be concluded

The attached graph displays the labor force participation rate (as a

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

Can be concluded	Cannot be concluded
		In 2007, the labor force participation rate was twice as high for South Dakota as for the United States as a whole.
		More South Dakotans were members of the labor force in 2007 than in 2006.
		For the years 2002 through 2008, South Dakota had a higher labor force participation rate than did the United States.

GMAT Graphs and Tables (G&T) Questions

The attached graph displays the labor force participation rate (as a

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards