Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.
Dec 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.- Dec 15
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!- Dec 17
09:00 AM PST
-10:00 AM PST
Join Manhattan Prep instructor Whitney Garner for a fun—and thorough—review of logic-based (non-math) problems, with a particular emphasis on Data Sufficiency and Two-Parts. - Dec 18
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
Here is the essential guide to securing scholarships as an MBA student! In this video, we explore the various types of scholarships available, including need-based and merit-based options.
16 Sep 2014, 01:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
59% (02:12) correct
41%
(02:16)
wrong
based on 108
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Last year, of the reported thefts that occurred in shopping malls in Texas, the percentage that took place in digital electronic stores increased by two percent from the year before. Because most thefts do not result in the return of stolen goods, this increase likely resulted in a negative economic impact on these digital electronic stores that was greater than the impact that had been accounted for by their yearly budgets, for stores make predictions about the loss of money due to theft based on the number of thefts they recorded in the previous year.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given?
A. People who steal and are not caught and forced to return the merchandise are likely to steal again.
B. The percentage of reported thefts in shopping malls in Texas that were from jewelry stores last year also increased.
C. Last year, of the total number of thefts from shopping malls across the United States, the percentage of thefts from shopping malls in Texas was lower than it had been the year before.
D. Merchandise stolen from digital electronics stores is generally more expensive than that stolen from other stores.
E. The number of total thefts that were reported in shopping malls in Texas last year was significantly lower than it has been in a decade.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given?
A. People who steal and are not caught and forced to return the merchandise are likely to steal again.
B. The percentage of reported thefts in shopping malls in Texas that were from jewelry stores last year also increased.
C. Last year, of the total number of thefts from shopping malls across the United States, the percentage of thefts from shopping malls in Texas was lower than it had been the year before.
D. Merchandise stolen from digital electronics stores is generally more expensive than that stolen from other stores.
E. The number of total thefts that were reported in shopping malls in Texas last year was significantly lower than it has been in a decade.
16 Sep 2014, 01:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Last year, of the reported thefts that occurred in shopping malls in Texas, the percentage that took place in digital electronic stores increased by two percent from the year before. Because most thefts do not result in the return of stolen goods, this increase likely resulted in a negative economic impact on these digital electronic stores that was greater than the impact that had been accounted for by their yearly budgets, for stores make predictions about the loss of money due to theft based on the number of thefts they recorded in the previous year.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given?
A. People who steal and are not caught and forced to return the merchandise are likely to steal again.
B. The percentage of reported thefts in shopping malls in Texas that were from jewelry stores last year also increased.
C. Last year, of the total number of thefts from shopping malls across the United States, the percentage of thefts from shopping malls in Texas was lower than it had been the year before.
D. Merchandise stolen from digital electronics stores is generally more expensive than that stolen from other stores.
E. The number of total thefts that were reported in shopping malls in Texas last year was significantly lower than it has been in a decade.
We are told that the percentage of total Texas mall thefts that took place in digital electronic stores has increased. We are also told that stores make predictions about loss based on the number of previous thefts, and that therefore, the stores may have been written their budgets without preparing for this increase.
There is a very important assumption in this argument. Namely, that the number of thefts that took place in digital electronic stores (in Texas malls) has increased. Knowing that the relative percentage of thefts in digital electronic stores, as opposed to all other stores, has increased, does not necessarily imply that the actual number of thefts in such stores has increased.
Let's look at an example to clarify: if there were 200 total thefts in Texas malls in a year, and 20 of them were in digital electronic stores, then 10 of the thefts were in such stores. If, the next year, 12 of Texas mall thefts were in digital electronic stores (the situation given in the prompt, with a 2 increase), this does not tell us that there were more thefts in digital electronic stores. If there were less overall thefts in malls (100, let's say), then there could be less thefts in digital electronic stores (12 rather than 20). The correct answer will point out this possibility.
Choice A refers to thieves that return to steal again. The argument does not refer to the thieves themselves in any capacity; because it is only the total number of thefts we are interested in, this choice is irrelevant to the situation at hand.
Choice B refers to jewelry stores. The relative percentage of thefts of a different type of store does not affect the overall number of thefts, the fact that is needed to weaken this argument.
Choice C is tempting. It claims that the percentage of thefts in Texas malls is lower than it had been in previous years, relative to the total number of thefts from malls overall. However, this choice is still dealing in percentages and not real numbers, and thus is still wrong. Without knowing the overall number of thefts in malls relative from one year to the next, this choice tells us nothing about the actual number of thefts in Texas malls, or the actual number of thefts in Texas mall electronic stores.
Choice D refers to the expense of the products stolen, relative to that of the products of other stores. This is irrelevant, because the predictions made by the electronic stores would, by definition, take the expense of the stolen products into account. This choice adds no new information and thus cannot weaken the argument.
Choice E refers to the total number of thefts in Texas malls, saying that it was lower than it had been in a decade (which includes the previous year as mentioned in the argument). This choice is correct; if the number of overall Texas mall thefts were lower (100 rather than 200, say), then the relative proportional increase of thefts in electronic stores would not necessarily lead to an increase in the real number of thefts in such stores. Without that real increase, the argument does not hold true.
Answer: E
Last year, of the reported thefts that occurred in shopping malls in Texas, the percentage that took place in digital electronic stores increased by two percent from the year before. Because most thefts do not result in the return of stolen goods, this increase likely resulted in a negative economic impact on these digital electronic stores that was greater than the impact that had been accounted for by their yearly budgets, for stores make predictions about the loss of money due to theft based on the number of thefts they recorded in the previous year.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given?
A. People who steal and are not caught and forced to return the merchandise are likely to steal again.
B. The percentage of reported thefts in shopping malls in Texas that were from jewelry stores last year also increased.
C. Last year, of the total number of thefts from shopping malls across the United States, the percentage of thefts from shopping malls in Texas was lower than it had been the year before.
D. Merchandise stolen from digital electronics stores is generally more expensive than that stolen from other stores.
E. The number of total thefts that were reported in shopping malls in Texas last year was significantly lower than it has been in a decade.
We are told that the percentage of total Texas mall thefts that took place in digital electronic stores has increased. We are also told that stores make predictions about loss based on the number of previous thefts, and that therefore, the stores may have been written their budgets without preparing for this increase.
There is a very important assumption in this argument. Namely, that the number of thefts that took place in digital electronic stores (in Texas malls) has increased. Knowing that the relative percentage of thefts in digital electronic stores, as opposed to all other stores, has increased, does not necessarily imply that the actual number of thefts in such stores has increased.
Let's look at an example to clarify: if there were 200 total thefts in Texas malls in a year, and 20 of them were in digital electronic stores, then 10 of the thefts were in such stores. If, the next year, 12 of Texas mall thefts were in digital electronic stores (the situation given in the prompt, with a 2 increase), this does not tell us that there were more thefts in digital electronic stores. If there were less overall thefts in malls (100, let's say), then there could be less thefts in digital electronic stores (12 rather than 20). The correct answer will point out this possibility.
Choice A refers to thieves that return to steal again. The argument does not refer to the thieves themselves in any capacity; because it is only the total number of thefts we are interested in, this choice is irrelevant to the situation at hand.
Choice B refers to jewelry stores. The relative percentage of thefts of a different type of store does not affect the overall number of thefts, the fact that is needed to weaken this argument.
Choice C is tempting. It claims that the percentage of thefts in Texas malls is lower than it had been in previous years, relative to the total number of thefts from malls overall. However, this choice is still dealing in percentages and not real numbers, and thus is still wrong. Without knowing the overall number of thefts in malls relative from one year to the next, this choice tells us nothing about the actual number of thefts in Texas malls, or the actual number of thefts in Texas mall electronic stores.
Choice D refers to the expense of the products stolen, relative to that of the products of other stores. This is irrelevant, because the predictions made by the electronic stores would, by definition, take the expense of the stolen products into account. This choice adds no new information and thus cannot weaken the argument.
Choice E refers to the total number of thefts in Texas malls, saying that it was lower than it had been in a decade (which includes the previous year as mentioned in the argument). This choice is correct; if the number of overall Texas mall thefts were lower (100 rather than 200, say), then the relative proportional increase of thefts in electronic stores would not necessarily lead to an increase in the real number of thefts in such stores. Without that real increase, the argument does not hold true.
Answer: E
19 Oct 2015, 03:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
Official Solution:
Last year, of the reported thefts that occurred in shopping malls in Texas, the percentage that took place in digital electronic stores increased by two percent from the year before. Because most thefts do not result in the return of stolen goods, this increase likely resulted in a negative economic impact on these digital electronic stores that was greater than the impact that had been accounted for by their yearly budgets, for stores make predictions about the loss of money due to theft based on the number of thefts they recorded in the previous year.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given?
A. People who steal and are not caught and forced to return the merchandise are likely to steal again.
B. The percentage of reported thefts in shopping malls in Texas that were from jewelry stores last year also increased.
C. Last year, of the total number of thefts from shopping malls across the United States, the percentage of thefts from shopping malls in Texas was lower than it had been the year before.
D. Merchandise stolen from digital electronics stores is generally more expensive than that stolen from other stores.
E. The number of total thefts that were reported in shopping malls in Texas last year was significantly lower than it has been in a decade.
We are told that the percentage of total Texas mall thefts that took place in digital electronic stores has increased. We are also told that stores make predictions about loss based on the number of previous thefts, and that therefore, the stores may have been written their budgets without preparing for this increase.
There is a very important assumption in this argument. Namely, that the number of thefts that took place in digital electronic stores (in Texas malls) has increased. Knowing that the relative percentage of thefts in digital electronic stores, as opposed to all other stores, has increased, does not necessarily imply that the actual number of thefts in such stores has increased.
Let's look at an example to clarify: if there were 200 total thefts in Texas malls in a year, and 20 of them were in digital electronic stores, then 10 of the thefts were in such stores. If, the next year, 12 of Texas mall thefts were in digital electronic stores (the situation given in the prompt, with a 2 increase), this does not tell us that there were more thefts in digital electronic stores. If there were less overall thefts in malls (100, let's say), then there could be less thefts in digital electronic stores (12 rather than 20). The correct answer will point out this possibility.
Choice A refers to thieves that return to steal again. The argument does not refer to the thieves themselves in any capacity; because it is only the total number of thefts we are interested in, this choice is irrelevant to the situation at hand.
Choice B refers to jewelry stores. The relative percentage of thefts of a different type of store does not affect the overall number of thefts, the fact that is needed to weaken this argument.
Choice C is tempting. It claims that the percentage of thefts in Texas malls is lower than it had been in previous years, relative to the total number of thefts from malls overall. However, this choice is still dealing in percentages and not real numbers, and thus is still wrong. Without knowing the overall number of thefts in malls relative from one year to the next, this choice tells us nothing about the actual number of thefts in Texas malls, or the actual number of thefts in Texas mall electronic stores.
Choice D refers to the expense of the products stolen, relative to that of the products of other stores. This is irrelevant, because the predictions made by the electronic stores would, by definition, take the expense of the stolen products into account. This choice adds no new information and thus cannot weaken the argument.
Choice E refers to the total number of thefts in Texas malls, saying that it was lower than it had been in a decade (which includes the previous year as mentioned in the argument). This choice is correct; if the number of overall Texas mall thefts were lower (100 rather than 200, say), then the relative proportional increase of thefts in electronic stores would not necessarily lead to an increase in the real number of thefts in such stores. Without that real increase, the argument does not hold true.
Answer: E
Last year, of the reported thefts that occurred in shopping malls in Texas, the percentage that took place in digital electronic stores increased by two percent from the year before. Because most thefts do not result in the return of stolen goods, this increase likely resulted in a negative economic impact on these digital electronic stores that was greater than the impact that had been accounted for by their yearly budgets, for stores make predictions about the loss of money due to theft based on the number of thefts they recorded in the previous year.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument given?
A. People who steal and are not caught and forced to return the merchandise are likely to steal again.
B. The percentage of reported thefts in shopping malls in Texas that were from jewelry stores last year also increased.
C. Last year, of the total number of thefts from shopping malls across the United States, the percentage of thefts from shopping malls in Texas was lower than it had been the year before.
D. Merchandise stolen from digital electronics stores is generally more expensive than that stolen from other stores.
E. The number of total thefts that were reported in shopping malls in Texas last year was significantly lower than it has been in a decade.
We are told that the percentage of total Texas mall thefts that took place in digital electronic stores has increased. We are also told that stores make predictions about loss based on the number of previous thefts, and that therefore, the stores may have been written their budgets without preparing for this increase.
There is a very important assumption in this argument. Namely, that the number of thefts that took place in digital electronic stores (in Texas malls) has increased. Knowing that the relative percentage of thefts in digital electronic stores, as opposed to all other stores, has increased, does not necessarily imply that the actual number of thefts in such stores has increased.
Let's look at an example to clarify: if there were 200 total thefts in Texas malls in a year, and 20 of them were in digital electronic stores, then 10 of the thefts were in such stores. If, the next year, 12 of Texas mall thefts were in digital electronic stores (the situation given in the prompt, with a 2 increase), this does not tell us that there were more thefts in digital electronic stores. If there were less overall thefts in malls (100, let's say), then there could be less thefts in digital electronic stores (12 rather than 20). The correct answer will point out this possibility.
Choice A refers to thieves that return to steal again. The argument does not refer to the thieves themselves in any capacity; because it is only the total number of thefts we are interested in, this choice is irrelevant to the situation at hand.
Choice B refers to jewelry stores. The relative percentage of thefts of a different type of store does not affect the overall number of thefts, the fact that is needed to weaken this argument.
Choice C is tempting. It claims that the percentage of thefts in Texas malls is lower than it had been in previous years, relative to the total number of thefts from malls overall. However, this choice is still dealing in percentages and not real numbers, and thus is still wrong. Without knowing the overall number of thefts in malls relative from one year to the next, this choice tells us nothing about the actual number of thefts in Texas malls, or the actual number of thefts in Texas mall electronic stores.
Choice D refers to the expense of the products stolen, relative to that of the products of other stores. This is irrelevant, because the predictions made by the electronic stores would, by definition, take the expense of the stolen products into account. This choice adds no new information and thus cannot weaken the argument.
Choice E refers to the total number of thefts in Texas malls, saying that it was lower than it had been in a decade (which includes the previous year as mentioned in the argument). This choice is correct; if the number of overall Texas mall thefts were lower (100 rather than 200, say), then the relative proportional increase of thefts in electronic stores would not necessarily lead to an increase in the real number of thefts in such stores. Without that real increase, the argument does not hold true.
Answer: E
hi,
I feel no option is right.
My analysis:
1. If the total no. of thefts in the previous year is 100, then 10% means 10
Now since the passage says that the percentage has increased by 2%.
2. if the total no. of thefts this year is 50, then 12% is 6
on the other hand,
3. if the total no. of thefts this year is 200, then 12% is 24.
Now a correct answer option should mention, either directly or indirectly, that the absolute number of thefts in digital stores this year is lower than that in the previous yr.
But none of the options says so.
Even the option E says that the no. of thefts are lower last yr. This implies--
a) if we include this yr in the decade, then it actually strengthens the conclusion.
b) if we don't include this yr in the decade, then it doesn't provide any information to undermine conclusion.
Plz correct me if im wrong.
