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.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
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. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
60% (01:44) correct
40%
(01:58)
wrong
based on 9886
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms are prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes on street corners. Since virtually everyone has access to a private telephone, these alarm boxes have outlived their usefulness. Therefore, we propose to remove the boxes. Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect?
(A) The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from.
(B) Maintaining the fire alarm boxes costs Springfield approximately five million dollars annually.
(C) A telephone call can provide the fire department with more information about the nature and size of a fire than can an alarm placed from an alarm box.
(D) Responding to false alarms significantly reduces the fire department's capacity for responding to fires.
(E) On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones in Springfield are out of service.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect?
(A) The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from.
(B) Maintaining the fire alarm boxes costs Springfield approximately five million dollars annually.
(C) A telephone call can provide the fire department with more information about the nature and size of a fire than can an alarm placed from an alarm box.
(D) Responding to false alarms significantly reduces the fire department's capacity for responding to fires.
(E) On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones in Springfield are out of service.
06 Apr 2016, 01:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
The "announced effect" is that removing the fire alarm boxes on street corners "will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire."
Why does the commissioner believe that removing those alarm boxes will reduce the number of prank calls? "The vast majority of false fire alarms are prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes." The commissioner implies that it would be more difficult to make anonymous prank calls from private telephones rather than from public fire alarm boxes on street corners, but what if that isn't the case?
Also, what if removing those public fire alarm boxes limits people's ability to report fires? According to the commissioner, this is not a problem "since virtually everyone has access to a private telephone."
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, "will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire."?
The commissioner claims that the number of prank calls would be reduced if people could only report fires with private telephones rather than with public fire alarm boxes. But what if people could still make anonymous reports from their private telephones? That would weaken the commissioners argument. Choice (A) assures us that the private calls will, in fact, be traced, likely discouraging people from making prank calls from their private telephones. Thus, (A) supports the commissioner's claim.
The cost of maintaining the fire alarm boxes has nothing to do with the effect that removing those boxes would have on the number of prank calls or people's ability to report fires. Eliminate (B).
Choice (C) describes a possible advantage of reporting fires with private telephones instead of fire alarm boxes. However, as with choice (B), this has nothing to do with the effect that removing those boxes would have on the number of prank calls or people's ability to report fires. (C) is out.
Choice (D) explains a negative consequence of prank calls but does give us any reason to believe that removing the fire alarm boxes would reduce the number of prank calls. Eliminate (D).
Choice (E) might strengthen the commissioner's claim that the "alarm boxes have outlived their usefulness," but it does not support the commissioner's claim that the proposal "will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire." Eliminate (E).
Choice (A) is the best answer.
Why does the commissioner believe that removing those alarm boxes will reduce the number of prank calls? "The vast majority of false fire alarms are prank calls made anonymously from fire alarm boxes." The commissioner implies that it would be more difficult to make anonymous prank calls from private telephones rather than from public fire alarm boxes on street corners, but what if that isn't the case?
Also, what if removing those public fire alarm boxes limits people's ability to report fires? According to the commissioner, this is not a problem "since virtually everyone has access to a private telephone."
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, "will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire."?
Quote:
The commissioner claims that the number of prank calls would be reduced if people could only report fires with private telephones rather than with public fire alarm boxes. But what if people could still make anonymous reports from their private telephones? That would weaken the commissioners argument. Choice (A) assures us that the private calls will, in fact, be traced, likely discouraging people from making prank calls from their private telephones. Thus, (A) supports the commissioner's claim.
Quote:
The cost of maintaining the fire alarm boxes has nothing to do with the effect that removing those boxes would have on the number of prank calls or people's ability to report fires. Eliminate (B).
Quote:
Choice (C) describes a possible advantage of reporting fires with private telephones instead of fire alarm boxes. However, as with choice (B), this has nothing to do with the effect that removing those boxes would have on the number of prank calls or people's ability to report fires. (C) is out.
Quote:
Choice (D) explains a negative consequence of prank calls but does give us any reason to believe that removing the fire alarm boxes would reduce the number of prank calls. Eliminate (D).
Quote:
Choice (E) might strengthen the commissioner's claim that the "alarm boxes have outlived their usefulness," but it does not support the commissioner's claim that the proposal "will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire." Eliminate (E).
Choice (A) is the best answer.
22 Sep 2010, 10:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
saxenashobhit
One of the premises given by the author is that "virtually everyone has access to a private telephone", which they can use to call in a fire alarm. This would include the people who currently use the fire alarm boxes to make prank calls. Suppose all the fire alarm boxes are removed. The pranksters can still use their private phones to make phone calls, and so the amount of prank calls will not necessarily be reduced. But if the fire department traces all calls made from private phones and are able to determine where they came from (and potentially the identity of the prank caller), this would discourage the pranksters from calling and would thus probably result in a reduction in the amount of prank calls.
