GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 21 Feb 2020, 01:47

### 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

# Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4335
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 00:57
8
61
00:00

Difficulty:

85% (hard)

Question Stats:

55% (02:27) correct 45% (02:31) wrong based on 1502 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under routine supervision. A recent program has allowed criminals to leave prison early under intensive supervision; they must obey curfews and in some cases they must be electronically monitored. The percentage of released criminals arrested while under supervision is the same for intensive supervision as for routine supervision, so intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

(A) The criminals under intensive supervision, but not those under routine supervision, were required to work or attend school during their supervision period.

(B) All of the criminals who were arrested while under routine supervision had been in prison more than once before being paroled and put under supervision.

(C) The proportion of arrests to crimes committed was not significantly higher for criminals under intensive supervision than those under routine supervision.

(D) Of the criminals arrested while under intensive supervision, some would not have committed crimes if they had been under routine supervision.

(E) The number of criminals put under routine supervision was not significantly greater than the number of criminals put under intensive supervision.

_________________
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 10112
Location: Pune, India
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Oct 2014, 22:26
15
4
souvik101990 wrote:
Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under routine supervision. A recent program has allowed criminals to leave prison early under intensive supervision; they must obey curfews and in some cases they must be electronically monitored. The percentage of released criminals arrested while under supervision is the same for intensive supervision as for routine supervision, so intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

(A) The criminals under intensive supervision, but not those under routine supervision, were required to work or attend school during their supervision period.

(B) All of the criminals who were arrested while under routine supervision had been in prison more than once before being paroled and put under supervision.

(C) The proportion of arrests to crimes committed was not significantly higher for criminals under intensive supervision than those under routine supervision.

(D) Of the criminals arrested while under intensive supervision, some would not have committed crimes if they had been under routine supervision.

(E) The number of criminals put under routine supervision was not significantly greater than the number of criminals put under intensive supervision.

Responding to a pm:

Premises:
Criminals released on parole are put under routine supervision.
A recent program allows criminals to leave prison early under intensive supervision;
The percentage of re-arrests is same for intensive supervision as well as for routine supervision.

Conclusion:
intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes

The key word is highlighted. We are saying that since both types of supervision result in the same percentage of re-arrests, it means both have the same success rate in preventing crimes. There is a gap in this logic. Based on the number of re-arrests (which is same for both), we are assuming the number of crimes committed are the same under both types of supervision. What if, number of crimes committed is much higher under routine supervision but re-arrests are rarer? Then can we say that both methods are equally effective in preventing crimes? No. So option (C) is an assumption. It says that the proportion of arrests to crimes committed was similar in both.

On the other hand, (E) doesn't affect our argument. The number put under each is of no consequence to us. We are comparing percentages. Since their percentages are similar, we can certainly compare their effectiveness even if the number of criminals is different.

_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
##### General Discussion
Manager
Joined: 06 Mar 2014
Posts: 219
Location: India
GMAT Date: 04-30-2015
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Nov 2014, 20:13
2
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
souvik101990 wrote:
Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under routine supervision. A recent program has allowed criminals to leave prison early under intensive supervision; they must obey curfews and in some cases they must be electronically monitored. The percentage of released criminals arrested while under supervision is the same for intensive supervision as for routine supervision, so intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

(A) The criminals under intensive supervision, but not those under routine supervision, were required to work or attend school during their supervision period.

(B) All of the criminals who were arrested while under routine supervision had been in prison more than once before being paroled and put under supervision.

(C) The proportion of arrests to crimes committed was not significantly higher for criminals under intensive supervision than those under routine supervision.

(D) Of the criminals arrested while under intensive supervision, some would not have committed crimes if they had been under routine supervision.

(E) The number of criminals put under routine supervision was not significantly greater than the number of criminals put under intensive supervision.

Responding to a pm:

Premises:
Criminals released on parole are put under routine supervision.
A recent program allows criminals to leave prison early under intensive supervision;
The percentage of re-arrests is same for intensive supervision as well as for routine supervision.

Conclusion:
intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes

The key word is highlighted. We are saying that since both types of supervision result in the same percentage of re-arrests, it means both have the same success rate in preventing crimes. There is a gap in this logic. Based on the number of re-arrests (which is same for both), we are assuming the number of crimes committed are the same under both types of supervision. What if, number of crimes committed is much higher under routine supervision but re-arrests are rarer? Then can we say that both methods are equally effective in preventing crimes? No. So option (C) is an assumption. It says that the proportion of arrests to crimes committed was similar in both.

On the other hand, (E) doesn't affect our argument. The number put under each is of no consequence to us. We are comparing percentages. Since their percentages are similar, we can certainly compare their effectiveness even if the number of criminals is different.

VeritasPrepKarishma,

Just need a bit of clarity on the highlighted portion: It says that we are assuming that no. of crimes committed are same under both types of supervision.
Please correct me, if i am wrong but are we not assuming that the PROPORTION of re-arrests to crimes committed is same for both types of supervision.

$$Re-arrests/Crimes Committed$$ for Intense Supervision = $$Re-arrests/Crimes Committed$$ for Routine Supervision

We are given that the Percentage of re-arrests is same under both types of supervision but that doesn't mean that the number of re-arrests is same, right?
And by that logic, we can conclude that the two ratios must be equal, hence the same proportion but not necessarily have the same numbers.
For ex: re-arrests to no. of crimes committed proportion for both routine and intense supervision respectively-:
$$3/5 = 6/10$$
So, here the number of crimes committed are different, yet the two ratios are equal.

Thank you.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 10112
Location: Pune, India
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Feb 2020, 01:00
2
varotkorn wrote:

Q1. I'm not sure what is the negation of choice D.

Is this correct?:

Of the criminals arrested while under intensive supervision, NONE would NOT have committed crimes if they had been under routine supervision.
=
Of the criminals arrested while under intensive supervision, ALL would have committed crimes if they had been under routine supervision.

Q2. "no more effective" in the stimulus means equally effective OR less effective, right?
Thank you!

Yes, "some" = "at least one"
Negation is "none". Then we have a double negative.
So negation of "Some would not have done A" is "All would have done A."

"no more effective" usually implies "equally effective". But technically it can mean either. It just means that A is not more effective than B. Then A could be equally effective or less effective.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Manager
Joined: 26 May 2014
Posts: 66
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
Schools: HKUST '15, ISB '15
GMAT Date: 12-26-2014
GPA: 3
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 01:32
1
i found it pretty difficult.took lot more than stipulated time.hope i am correct.
Manager
Joined: 10 Feb 2014
Posts: 80
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 01:44
1
Okay...1:20 sec!! A good one to round up these criminals and the contest!! ...

Btw Souvik, if I am not wrong, today's is the last question of RAGCT?
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 10112
Location: Pune, India
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Jul 2015, 22:32
1
earnit wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
souvik101990 wrote:
Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under routine supervision. A recent program has allowed criminals to leave prison early under intensive supervision; they must obey curfews and in some cases they must be electronically monitored. The percentage of released criminals arrested while under supervision is the same for intensive supervision as for routine supervision, so intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

(A) The criminals under intensive supervision, but not those under routine supervision, were required to work or attend school during their supervision period.

(B) All of the criminals who were arrested while under routine supervision had been in prison more than once before being paroled and put under supervision.

(C) The proportion of arrests to crimes committed was not significantly higher for criminals under intensive supervision than those under routine supervision.

(D) Of the criminals arrested while under intensive supervision, some would not have committed crimes if they had been under routine supervision.

(E) The number of criminals put under routine supervision was not significantly greater than the number of criminals put under intensive supervision.

Responding to a pm:

Premises:
Criminals released on parole are put under routine supervision.
A recent program allows criminals to leave prison early under intensive supervision;
The percentage of re-arrests is same for intensive supervision as well as for routine supervision.

Conclusion:
intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes

The key word is highlighted. We are saying that since both types of supervision result in the same percentage of re-arrests, it means both have the same success rate in preventing crimes. There is a gap in this logic. Based on the number of re-arrests (which is same for both), we are assuming the number of crimes committed are the same under both types of supervision. What if, number of crimes committed is much higher under routine supervision but re-arrests are rarer? Then can we say that both methods are equally effective in preventing crimes? No. So option (C) is an assumption. It says that the proportion of arrests to crimes committed was similar in both.

On the other hand, (E) doesn't affect our argument. The number put under each is of no consequence to us. We are comparing percentages. Since their percentages are similar, we can certainly compare their effectiveness even if the number of criminals is different.

VeritasPrepKarishma,

Just need a bit of clarity on the highlighted portion: It says that we are assuming that no. of crimes committed are same under both types of supervision.
Please correct me, if i am wrong but are we not assuming that the PROPORTION of re-arrests to crimes committed is same for both types of supervision.

$$Re-arrests/Crimes Committed$$ for Intense Supervision = $$Re-arrests/Crimes Committed$$ for Routine Supervision

We are given that the Percentage of re-arrests is same under both types of supervision but that doesn't mean that the number of re-arrests is same, right?
And by that logic, we can conclude that the two ratios must be equal, hence the same proportion but not necessarily have the same numbers.
For ex: re-arrests to no. of crimes committed proportion for both routine and intense supervision respectively-:
$$3/5 = 6/10$$
So, here the number of crimes committed are different, yet the two ratios are equal.

Thank you.

We are given that the percentage of re-arrests is the same. This means that if 100 people each were released under the two systems, in both cases there were say, 10 re-arrests. (So 10% re-arrests in both cases) - This is given.
But to arrive at the conclusion, we are assuming that the percentage of crimes committed was the same in both cases. So if 100 people were released under each program, we need to assume that the same number committed crimes in both cases to be able to say that "intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes".

Point is that the argument gives the link between re-arrests and criminals released. But it draws conclusion of the link between re-arrests and the actual number of crimes. The argument tells us nothing about the actual number of crimes. The actual number of crimes could have been very different in the two cases. Perhaps 30 of the people released under routine supervision committed crimes again but only 10 got re-arrested... On the other hand, only 15 of the people released under intense supervision committed crimes again and 10 got re-arrested. We are assuming that this is not the case to conclude that "intensive supervision is not more effective".
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Retired Moderator
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Posts: 612
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 01:51
1
easy pick on this one . typical of gmat
CHEERS

souvik101990 wrote:
Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under routine supervision. A recent program has allowed criminals to leave prison early under intensive supervision; they must obey curfews and in some cases they must be electronically monitored. The percentage of released criminals arrested while under supervision is the same for intensive supervision as for routine supervision, so intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument relies?

(A) The criminals under intensive supervision, but not those under routine supervision, were required to work or attend school during their supervision period.

(B) All of the criminals who were arrested while under routine supervision had been in prison more than once before being paroled and put under supervision.

(C) The proportion of arrests to crimes committed was not significantly higher for criminals under intensive supervision than those under routine supervision.

(D) Of the criminals arrested while under intensive supervision, some would not have committed crimes if they had been under routine supervision.

(E) The number of criminals put under routine supervision was not significantly greater than the number of criminals put under intensive supervision.
Intern
Joined: 02 Jun 2014
Posts: 1
Location: United States
GMAT Date: 11-25-2014
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Consulting)
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 05:49
Pre-thinking helped me to locate the answer...

Hope got it correct...
Board of Directors
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2468
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 07:47
raced against the timer and got it wrong I guess
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 157
Location: United States
Concentration: Economics, Finance
GMAT Date: 10-16-2013
GPA: 3
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 08:00
Prethinking is the key to answering such questions.
Intern
Joined: 29 Apr 2014
Posts: 7
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V35
GPA: 3.5
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 08:22
phew! that was a tough one! Still not 100% sure though...waiting for the OE!
Intern
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
Posts: 11
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 09:13
That took a while ! Is it something to do with comparing percentages to numbers?
_________________
'I read somewhere... how important it is in life not necessarily to be strong, but to feel strong... to measure yourself at least once.'
Intern
Joined: 26 Jun 2014
Posts: 5
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 10:55
hope thiz time my answer is rite.....
waiting for OE....
Intern
Joined: 12 May 2013
Posts: 44
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2014, 11:41
Took a lot of time to answer the question !
found it a bit tricky
Waiting for OA
Director
Joined: 03 Feb 2013
Posts: 838
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.88
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Oct 2014, 07:49
Tried to solve it again and there I did the mistake.

The percentage of released criminals arrested while under supervision is the same for intensive supervision as for routine supervision, so intensive supervision is no more effective than routine supervision in preventing criminals from committing additional crimes

Leap of faith from arrested to committing crimes. Option C) bridges the gap.
Retired Moderator
Status: On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sit on a throne of blood.
Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Posts: 295
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Oct 2014, 09:34
Almost forgot to answer this question. Hope I wasnt too late
Intern
Joined: 23 Aug 2014
Posts: 6
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Oct 2014, 20:20
a very tricky question but i managed to get the answer slightly under a minute... phew :D
Intern
Joined: 09 Jul 2014
Posts: 19
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Oct 2014, 01:15
souvik101990 : its a very good question .. +kudos to u .
but i took 2 min to answer this one is it too much time consumption for these type qstn ?
Also please post the OA with OE.

thanks
Current Student
Joined: 17 Jun 2014
Posts: 79
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GMAT 2: 740 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.8
WE: Business Development (Insurance)
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Oct 2014, 03:11
I am really stuck between C and E. can my any GC friend sail please me out of this question's maze.
Re: Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under   [#permalink] 08 Oct 2014, 03:11

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 41 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Criminals released from prison on parole have generally been put under

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne