GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 24 Jun 2018, 07:44

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 04 Nov 2017
Posts: 222
Location: United States
Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2018, 20:29
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (01:32) correct 39% (01:46) wrong based on 142 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases are less likely to convict a suspect if the jury members know that there is a possibility that the suspect will be sentenced to death. However, this is not shown to be true in statistics. In State X, which has the death penalty, the conviction rate in murder cases is slightly over eighty percent. In State Y, which does not have the death penalty, the conviction rate in murder cases is seventy percent.

The argument above is flawed in that it ignores the possibility that

A. State Y has a larger number of murder cases than does State X.
B. State X has a larger number of murder cases than does State Y.
C. over seventy percent of the people who live in State Y oppose the death penalty.
D. the governor of State X is a former state prosecutor, is an outspoken proponent of the death penalty, and has been reelected two times by sweeping majorities.
E. an independent look at the evidence in murder cases in State X shows that more than ninety percent of murder suspects were guilty; a similar examination of murder cases in State Y shows that seventy percent of murder suspects were guilty.

_________________

“Learning is a treasure that will follow its owner everywhere.”

Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 1022
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Re: Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2018, 11:21
2
Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases are less likely to convict a suspect if the jury members know that there is a possibility that the suspect will be sentenced to death. However, this is not shown to be true in statistics. In State X, which has the death penalty, the conviction rate in murder cases is slightly over eighty percent. In State Y, which does not have the death penalty, the conviction rate in murder cases is seventy percent.

The argument above is flawed in that it ignores the possibility that

A. State Y has a larger number of murder cases than does State X. -How much larger than that of X? E is better than A.
B. State X has a larger number of murder cases than does State Y. -It would strengthen the argument.
C. over seventy percent of the people who live in State Y oppose the death penalty. -Out of scope
D. the governor of State X is a former state prosecutor, is an outspoken proponent of the death penalty, and has been reelected two times by sweeping majorities. -out of scope
E. an independent look at the evidence in murder cases in State X shows that more than ninety percent of murder suspects were guilty; a similar examination of murder cases in State Y shows that seventy percent of murder suspects were guilty. -Correct. Suppose both X and Y had 100 people presented before the jury. Then in X out of 95 only 80 were convicted, whereas in Y 70 out of 70 were convicted. This is line with the very first statement of the passage that if the jury knew about death sentence then it didn't convict the criminal. So jury saved people in X but didn't in Y. This shows that the conclusion "this is not shown to be true in statistics" is wrong.
_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Long And A Fruitful Journey - V21 to V41; If I can, So Can You!!

My study resources:
1. Useful Formulae, Concepts and Tricks-Quant
2. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
3. LSAT RC compilation
4. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
5. QOTD RC (Carcass)
6. Challange OG RC
7. GMAT Prep Challenge RC

Manager
Joined: 04 Nov 2017
Posts: 222
Location: United States
Re: Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2018, 11:37
gmatexam439 wrote:
Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases are less likely to convict a suspect if the jury members know that there is a possibility that the suspect will be sentenced to death. However, this is not shown to be true in statistics. In State X, which has the death penalty, the conviction rate in murder cases is slightly over eighty percent. In State Y, which does not have the death penalty, the conviction rate in murder cases is seventy percent.

The argument above is flawed in that it ignores the possibility that

A. State Y has a larger number of murder cases than does State X. -How much larger than that of X? E is better than A.
B. State X has a larger number of murder cases than does State Y. -It would strengthen the argument.
C. over seventy percent of the people who live in State Y oppose the death penalty. -Out of scope
D. the governor of State X is a former state prosecutor, is an outspoken proponent of the death penalty, and has been reelected two times by sweeping majorities. -out of scope
E. an independent look at the evidence in murder cases in State X shows that more than ninety percent of murder suspects were guilty; a similar examination of murder cases in State Y shows that seventy percent of murder suspects were guilty. -Correct. Suppose both X and Y had 100 people presented before the jury. Then in X out of 95 only 80 were convicted, whereas in Y 70 out of 70 were convicted. This is line with the very first statement of the passage that if the jury knew about death sentence then it didn't convict the criminal. So jury saved people in X but didn't in Y. This shows that the conclusion "this is not shown to be true in statistics" is wrong.

Make sense thanks

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
_________________

“Learning is a treasure that will follow its owner everywhere.”

Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 1022
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Re: Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2018, 11:51
2
gmatFalcon wrote:
gmatexam439 wrote:
Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases are less likely to convict a suspect if the jury members know that there is a possibility that the suspect will be sentenced to death. However, this is not shown to be true in statistics. In State X, which has the death penalty, the conviction rate in murder cases is slightly over eighty percent. In State Y, which does not have the death penalty, the conviction rate in murder cases is seventy percent.

The argument above is flawed in that it ignores the possibility that

A. State Y has a larger number of murder cases than does State X. -How much larger than that of X? E is better than A.
B. State X has a larger number of murder cases than does State Y. -It would strengthen the argument.
C. over seventy percent of the people who live in State Y oppose the death penalty. -Out of scope
D. the governor of State X is a former state prosecutor, is an outspoken proponent of the death penalty, and has been reelected two times by sweeping majorities. -out of scope
E. an independent look at the evidence in murder cases in State X shows that more than ninety percent of murder suspects were guilty; a similar examination of murder cases in State Y shows that seventy percent of murder suspects were guilty. -Correct. Suppose both X and Y had 100 people presented before the jury. Then in X out of 95 only 80 were convicted, whereas in Y 70 out of 70 were convicted. This is line with the very first statement of the passage that if the jury knew about death sentence then it didn't convict the criminal. So jury saved people in X but didn't in Y. This shows that the conclusion "this is not shown to be true in statistics" is wrong.

Make sense thanks

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Kudos is also a good way to say thanks
_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Long And A Fruitful Journey - V21 to V41; If I can, So Can You!!

My study resources:
1. Useful Formulae, Concepts and Tricks-Quant
2. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
3. LSAT RC compilation
4. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
5. QOTD RC (Carcass)
6. Challange OG RC
7. GMAT Prep Challenge RC

Re: Psychologists have asserted in the past that juries in murder cases   [#permalink] 16 Jan 2018, 11:51
Display posts from previous: Sort by