Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 07:55 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 07:55
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   
655-705 Level|   Strengthen|                  
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
 [1]
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 17 Apr 2018, 18:01
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
RonPurewal says: GMAT exam (include CR) is never tricky, or disingenuous, or purposely obtuse. Don't you think that the word ''we'' makes the CR tricky, or disingenuous, or purposely obtuse?
May I've your opinion, please?
Thanks__
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 17 Apr 2018, 20:15
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AsadAbu
RonPurewal says: GMAT exam (include CR) is never tricky, or disingenuous, or purposely obtuse. Don't you think that the word ''we'' makes the CR tricky, or disingenuous, or purposely obtuse?
May I've your opinion, please?
Thanks__
Show more

I'm with RonPurewal in this case. :)

Going back to the prompt, let's ask ourselves one question: If "We" does not refer to the fire department, then whom could it possibly refer to in this prompt?

Prank callers are not on the Fire Commissioner's side. He wouldn't put himself in the same group as the people he's trying to stop.
If the pronoun were referring to people reporting fires, it would take the form "they." Also, people reporting fires are the group that the fire department is trying to serve. It makes no sense for the Fire Commissioner to put himself in the same grammatical group as them, especially when proposing a department decision.

Remember, this is not an SC question, so none of the pronouns in the prompt are open to question. If the GMAT were designing this question to make us doubt the reasonable usage of pronouns, then it probably would be obtuse. But what we see here is very straightforward usage, in line with what we'd expect in any managerial scenario.

Plus, the question we're asked does not call into question who is saying what, so we shouldn't spend precious time coming up with alternate interpretations or thinking of ways we'd prefer to write the prompt. We should stay focused on answering the the question about this proposal.

I hope this helps!
User avatar
MikeScarn
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 04 Sep 2017
Last visit: 01 Jun 2025
Posts: 275
Own Kudos:
1,280
Given Kudos: 227
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Technology, Leadership
Schools: Tuck '24 (WA) Harvard '24 (D) Kellogg '24 (WA) Wharton '24 (D) Haas '24 (D) Sloan '24 (D) Fuqua '24 (D) Booth '24 (M) Yale '24 (A$)
GMAT 1: 690 Q44 V41
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.62
WE:Sales (Computer Software)
Schools: Tuck '24 (WA) Harvard '24 (D) Kellogg '24 (WA) Wharton '24 (D) Haas '24 (D) Sloan '24 (D) Fuqua '24 (D) Booth '24 (M) Yale '24 (A$)
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
Posts: 275
Kudos: 1,280
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 17 Apr 2018, 20:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Are we sure this is an OG question?

I don't see the direct correlation between [A] and the question stem.

Ninja's explanation for [A]: "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."

So the FD has the ability to trace calls from private phones... Okay, do we know for sure that this means that prank calls will be reduced? What if stupid kids think they can *69? What if it's not public knowledge that the FD can trace calls, then people would still do prank calls.

The premise talks about anonymous prank calls. The conclusion only talks about prank calls. It never explicit says "anonymous. I see this as a noteworthy gap.

[A] talks about removing anonymity. Okay... but the proposal only aims to reduce prank calls, anonymous or not anonymous. I feel like [A] is irrelevant. How can we just assume that tracing calls will lead to people not making prank calls?

I am new to CR, so I am just trying to understand what is wrong with my reasoning. Thanks!
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
 [1]
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 17 Apr 2018, 22:33
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
MikeScarn
Are we sure this is an OG question?

I don't see the direct correlation between [A] and the question stem.

Ninja's explanation for [A]: "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."

So the FD has the ability to trace calls from private phones... Okay, do we know for sure that this means that prank calls will be reduced? What if stupid kids think they can *69? What if it's not public knowledge that the FD can trace calls, then people would still do prank calls.

The premise talks about anonymous prank calls. The conclusion only talks about prank calls. It never explicit says "anonymous. I see this as a noteworthy gap.

[A] talks about removing anonymity. Okay... but the proposal only aims to reduce prank calls, anonymous or not anonymous. I feel like [A] is irrelevant. How can we just assume that tracing calls will lead to people not making prank calls?

I am new to CR, so I am just trying to understand what is wrong with my reasoning. Thanks!
Show more

Welcome to the wonderful world of CR, where we sometimes spend way too much energy agonizing over logical perfection when all we have to do is pick the best of 5 choices -- or the least-bad of the 5 answer choices. :)

You might want to check out this article for some foundational approaches to these questions, but here are some thoughts about this particular question:

  • Anonymous prank calls are a subset of all prank calls. In fact, we're told immediately and explicitly in the passage that anonymous prank calls are the vast majority of false fire alarms.
  • Like you've pointed out, the key connection between the stem and choice (A) is that anonymity. The commissioner says that the vast majority of false fire alarms are prank calls made anonymously. Choice (A) states that the fire department traces all alarm calls. If you succeed in tracing a call, by definition it cannot be anonymous anymore. The logic of this argument focuses on the role of anonymous prank calls, and since we're asked what can strengthen the argument, it's OK for us to keep that focus.
  • The only gap left here is potential other ways that prank callers could remain anonymous. The content of the call, or the type of prank call, is irrelevant to the proposal's logic -- which is that you can deter the vast majority of prank calls by removing the ability to make those calls anonymously.

One more general takeaway is to remember what we're being asked:

Quote:
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect?
Show more
We're looking for the choice that does the most to strengthen this argument. The right answer choice doesn't have to 100% prove the argument with airtight logic. In this case, sure, we can think of hypothetical prank callers who themselves don't care at all about being anonymous. But this doesn't change the fact that (A) is definitely doing more than any other choice to strengthen the argument.

If we approach this kind of question looking for a magic bullet, we may never be satisfied. But if we eliminate every choice that doesn't strengthen the argument and keep the one that does a better job than the other four, we'll be able to finish the question and move right along.

I hope this helps!
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 13 Dec 2018, 14:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
AsadAbu
RonPurewal says: GMAT exam (include CR) is never tricky, or disingenuous, or purposely obtuse. Don't you think that the word ''we'' makes the CR tricky, or disingenuous, or purposely obtuse?
May I've your opinion, please?
Thanks__

I'm with RonPurewal in this case. :)

Going back to the prompt, let's ask ourselves one question: If "We" does not refer to the fire department, then whom could it possibly refer to in this prompt?

Prank callers are not on the Fire Commissioner's side. He wouldn't put himself in the same group as the people he's trying to stop.
If the pronoun were referring to people reporting fires, it would take the form "they." Also, people reporting fires are the group that the fire department is trying to serve. It makes no sense for the Fire Commissioner to put himself in the same grammatical group as them, especially when proposing a department decision.

Remember, this is not an SC question, so none of the pronouns in the prompt are open to question. If the GMAT were designing this question to make us doubt the reasonable usage of pronouns, then it probably would be obtuse. But what we see here is very straightforward usage, in line with what we'd expect in any managerial scenario.

Plus, the question we're asked does not call into question who is saying what, so we shouldn't spend precious time coming up with alternate interpretations or thinking of ways we'd prefer to write the prompt. We should stay focused on answering the the question about this proposal.

I hope this helps!
Show more
Thanks for your broad explanation. :) :)
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 13 Dec 2018, 14:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
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.
Show more
Thanks GMATNinja for your above helpful comment.
Another query:
So, can I add another possible correct answer (F) for this CR? I mean: Is F legit choice for this CR?
F) Springfield just enacted a new law that mandates a minimum 30-year prison term for prank-calling the fire department.

Thanks__
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,489
Kudos: 2,387
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 01 Jan 2019, 16:43
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja


Quote:
(E) On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones in Springfield are out of service.

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).
Show more
The green part is okay (E doesn't support the commissioner's proposal) , because the correct choice is A :) . So, What E actually does? Does it weaken the commissioner's proposal only or is it irrelevant too?
Thanks__
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 20 Jan 2019, 05:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AsadAbu
GMATNinja


Quote:
(E) On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones in Springfield are out of service.

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).
The green part is okay (E doesn't support the commissioner's proposal) , because the correct choice is A :) . So, What E actually does? Does it weaken the commissioner's proposal only or is it irrelevant too?
Thanks__
Show more
(E) has zero impact on the idea that removing the alarm boxes "will reduce the number of prank calls." The availability of public telephones has zero impact on that. So (E) is basically irrelevant to the commissioner's claim about the proposal, and that's what we really care about.

AsadAbu
Quote:
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.
Thanks GMATNinja for your above helpful comment.
Another query:
So, can I add another possible correct answer (F) for this CR? I mean: Is F legit choice for this CR?
F) Springfield just enacted a new law that mandates a minimum 30-year prison term for prank-calling the fire department.

Thanks__
Show more
To be honest, I don't recommend creating your own answer choices as a way of understanding the argument. That's nothing something we'd ever do when taking the test, and ultimately we're trying to improve our ability to answer each question as it is designed and presented. If your answer choice isn't something that the GMAT would actually include in a question, why spend your time worrying about it? So stick with EXACTLY what's in the question, and don't worry about the rest.

I hope this helps!
User avatar
Shef08
User avatar
Joined: 01 Jan 2019
Last visit: 01 Apr 2025
Posts: 84
Own Kudos:
34
Given Kudos: 111
Location: Canada
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.24
Posts: 84
Kudos: 34
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 10 Feb 2019, 09:34
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
So this question is asking to support the premise and not the conclusion? Isn't it? As I squared in A and D, A supports the premise and D supports the conclusion. One has to choose wisely.

Am I correct in holding this view?
User avatar
LordStark
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 31 Aug 2016
Last visit: 28 Feb 2023
Posts: 293
Own Kudos:
1,125
Given Kudos: 911
Status:Valar Dohaeris
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V37
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V37
Posts: 293
Kudos: 1,125
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 28 Feb 2019, 06:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Shef08
So this question is asking to support the premise and not the conclusion? Isn't it? As I squared in A and D, A supports the premise and D supports the conclusion. One has to choose wisely.

Am I correct in holding this view?
Show more
hi Shef08
No I don't think so.
Conclusion: Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire

We need to find the mission link, which is "in what sense private telephone is different from a box, so that prank calls will be reduced".

Option A provides that missing link "The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from."
In private phone, we can trace all alarm calls whereas in public phone we don't know who raised the alarm.

I hope I make sense. :roll:
avatar
Arseniy8
avatar
Joined: 13 Aug 2018
Last visit: 22 Jan 2020
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
4
Given Kudos: 124
Posts: 8
Kudos: 4
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 26 Mar 2019, 13:17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
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."?

Quote:
(A) The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from.

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.
Show more

Dear GMATNinja,

I want to adress the question not about your choice, but more to the GMAT itself.
Despite of trying to test our ability to throw away ANY assumptions that seems to be outside of the text scope, it FORCE us to make such an assumptions.
Look into your logic (anyway, it is still right logic for this question):
- if the private calls be traced, it discourage people from prank calling.
This is clear assumption and this is something we should avoid. Maybe, we assume some after-tracking penalties, but we have nothing at the text about it. There is no factor in the text that helps to link tracking and discourage reaction.

I agree that another answer choices are incorrect as well.
But my point is that there is no right choice.

Looking for any response.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
 [1]
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 01 May 2019, 10:43
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Arseniy8
GMATNinja
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."?

Quote:
(A) The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from.

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.

Dear GMATNinja,

I want to adress the question not about your choice, but more to the GMAT itself.
Despite of trying to test our ability to throw away ANY assumptions that seems to be outside of the text scope, it FORCE us to make such an assumptions.
Look into your logic (anyway, it is still right logic for this question):
- if the private calls be traced, it discourage people from prank calling.
This is clear assumption and this is something we should avoid. Maybe, we assume some after-tracking penalties, but we have nothing at the text about it. There is no factor in the text that helps to link tracking and discourage reaction.

I agree that another answer choices are incorrect as well.
But my point is that there is no right choice.

Looking for any response.
Show more
I see your point!

But because we are looking for the choice that "most strongly supports the claim that the proposal will have the announced effect," we don't have to assume that anything is true. Sure, it is entirely possible that removing the alarm boxes will NOT reduce the number of prank calls... maybe the pranksters won't know or won't care that their calls are being traced.

But what we do know for sure is that the current prank calls are made anonymously and, given (A), that "the fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from." So we know without a doubt that "a vast majority" of the prank calls are made anonymously and that, if the proposal is implemented, there will be no way to make anonymous prank calls (since ALL calls made from private telephones are traced).

Again, we don't have to assume that this will actually reduce the number of prank calls. But it gives us a strong reason for thinking that it will. More importantly, none of the other options give us ANY reason to believe that the proposal will have the announced effect. We are looking for something that MOST STRONGLY SUPPORTS the claim. From that perspective, (A) is absolutely the best answer choice.
User avatar
ajaygaur319
User avatar
Joined: 05 May 2019
Last visit: 01 Jan 2021
Posts: 126
Own Kudos:
654
 [1]
Given Kudos: 143
Location: India
Schools: NYU Tech MBA "21
Schools: NYU Tech MBA "21
Posts: 126
Kudos: 654
 [1]
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 27 Feb 2020, 02:01
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Using egmat's falsification method to arrive at assumption, we can find what can strengthen this argument:

Premise: Everyone now owns a phone and they can call the fire department in emergency anytime from their personal telephone.
Conclusion: Removing the public alarm boxes will reduce the number of prank calls.

Falsification question
In What scenario: Removing the public alarm boxes will not reduce the number of prank calls.
Given that: everyone now owns a telephone

One scenario can be:
- When people are doing prank calls from their personal phone as well.

So assumption can be negation of above scenario
Assumption: People won't do prank calls from their phone. Anything around that will strengthen our conclusion.

Going through the answer choices:
(A) The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from. - Damn, that's exactly what we were looking for. It connects with our assumption and this should be the answer but let's go through all answer choices and reject each of them.
(B) Maintaining the fire alarm boxes costs Springfield approximately five million dollars annually. - This statement doesn't even relate to our conclusion
(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. - How can a telephone call provide this much of information and how does it relate to the conclusion of removing boxes :roll:
(D) Responding to false alarms significantly reduces the fire department's capacity for responding to fires. - That's actually strengthen the conclusion but the biggest flaw is that what if people start calling from their personal phone and have prank calls
(E) On any given day, a significant percentage of the public telephones in Springfield are out of service. - We don't have anything to do about the number of telephones which are out of service

Hence, A is the best choice.
User avatar
LILICHKA
User avatar
Joined: 23 Jan 2020
Last visit: 27 Feb 2023
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
25
Given Kudos: 74
Posts: 16
Kudos: 25
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 29 Apr 2020, 02:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
To me, option E seemed strong, since prank phone calls could be made from public phones, if alarm boxes were to be removed. And if many of them are out of order, this limits prankers' ability to make calls. I know the abstract doesn't say anything about public phones, but I think it still relates to the subject. I still went for option C, but didn't feel string about it, because it kind of plays the same role as public phones in option E (just limiting another way of making prank calls).
What are your thoughts?
User avatar
anantvarma
User avatar
Joined: 19 Feb 2020
Last visit: 19 Jul 2021
Posts: 6
Given Kudos: 1
Posts: 6
Kudos: 0
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 02 May 2020, 10:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Option (E) says that a significant percentage of public telephones are out of service. We need to strengthen the argument, and significant could be perceived as 51%. So if a majority of them are anyway not working and since everyone has a private telephone, anyway, then it makes sense to remove these boxes.

I get why option (A) is correct, but I am not able to eliminate option (E) for the above-said reasons. Please help me out with the explanation.

Thanks.
User avatar
CrackverbalGMAT
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,844
Own Kudos:
8,945
 [1]
Given Kudos: 225
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Location: India
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,844
Kudos: 8,945
 [1]
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 07 May 2020, 13:08
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
anantvarma
Option (E) says that a significant percentage of public telephones are out of service. We need to strengthen the argument, and significant could be perceived as 51%. So if a majority of them are anyway not working and since everyone has a private telephone, anyway, then it makes sense to remove these boxes.

I get why option (A) is correct, but I am not able to eliminate option (E) for the above-said reasons. Please help me out with the explanation.

Thanks.
Show more

Hi Anant

It is incorrect to interpret "significant" to mean "majority" ie; 51%. In different circumstances, different proportions may be considered "significant". For eg; a school may consider even a 10% absentee rate among teachers to be significant.

In this particular question, it cannot be stated with certainty what the threshold proportion of non-functioning public phones is for it to make sense to not have them. That removing the public phones will allow for fewer anonymous calls is well established in the stimulus itself. We thus require an answer option that tells us that similar calls would not be made from private telephones. Option (A) does that best.

Hope this helps.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
 [3]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
 [3]
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 18 May 2020, 13:52
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
LILICHKA
To me, option E seemed strong, since prank phone calls could be made from public phones, if alarm boxes were to be removed. And if many of them are out of order, this limits prankers' ability to make calls. I know the abstract doesn't say anything about public phones, but I think it still relates to the subject. I still went for option C, but didn't feel string about it, because it kind of plays the same role as public phones in option E (just limiting another way of making prank calls).
What are your thoughts?
Show more
For an in-depth discussion of (E), check out this earlier post and let me know if you have any additional questions!

To analyze (A) and (C), consider the commissioner’s argument:
  • ”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, the commissioner concludes, “Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire.”

So, the commissioner’s conclusion is that removing the boxes will do two things. First, it will reduce the number of prank calls. Second, it will not hamper people’s ability to report a fire.

The prompt asks which of the answer choices supports that conclusion.

Quote:
(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.
Show more
Remember, the commissioner’s conclusion is not that calls from telephones will be more effective at stopping fires but that removing the boxes will limit prank calls and will not hamper the ability to report a fire. While (C) supports the idea that reporting fires via telephone could be advantageous, that is not the commissioner’s argument. Therefore, we can eliminate (C).

Finally, here’s (A):

Quote:
(A) The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and records where they came from.
Show more
If (A) is true, then the public cannot make anonymous prank calls from their cellphones like they can from the alarm boxes. It’s reasonable to conclude that the lack of anonymity would discourage these prank calls. For that reason, (A) strengthens the commissioner’s conclusion and is correct.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
MHIKER
User avatar
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Last visit: 24 May 2021
Posts: 942
Own Kudos:
5,645
Given Kudos: 690
Status:No dream is too large, no dreamer is too small
Concentration: Accounting
Posts: 942
Kudos: 5,645
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 04 Dec 2020, 15:09
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jerrywu
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.
Show more


If the fire department can trace who or from where the call is coming then the callers will be careful to make calls and the prank call will reduce.

The answer is A.
User avatar
AnishPassi
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2014
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
661
 [1]
Given Kudos: 18
Status:GMAT Coach
Affiliations: The GMAT Co.
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Posts: 112
Kudos: 661
 [1]
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 24 Jan 2022, 21:36
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Abhishek009
guhabhishek
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?


Powerscore CR Bible states for Strengthens Questions suing the following steps -

1. Identify the conclusion - Therefore, we propose to remove the boxes.
2. Personalize the argument - Removing the alarm boxes will reduce prank calls , however the fire incidents are reported by private telephones.
3. Look for weakness in the argument - Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls but it will hamper people’s ability to report a fire.

Now check the options -

4. Argument of analogy/surveys - strengthen the analogy
5. Correct argument will strengthen the argument just a Little / Lot

Quote:
(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 $5 million 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.


The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and( false alarm calls can be reduced) records where they came from ( Functions as an alarm Box)

Hence correct Answer is (A)
Show more

That’s a very tricky slope. You missed an extremely important component in your explanation above: The Question Stem!

You've mentioned what the book states for "Strengthen Questions".

I have no issue with what the book might have said. I have an issue with trying to answer a question category instead of the specific question asked.

The question:
Quote:
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect?
Show more

"supports" means strengthens, no doubt.

But, support what?
The claim.

What claim?
That the proposal will have the announced effect.

What’s the proposal?
Remove the alarm boxes

What’s the announced effect?
Removing will "reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire"

So, what's the claim that needs to be supported?
Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire.

The question stem already tells us exactly what needs to be strengthened.


Be careful:
Quote:
1. Identify the conclusion - Therefore, we propose to remove the boxes.
Show more

This is not the statement that needs to be strengthened here.

****

Many times the question stems are generic. E.g.:
Quote:
Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the argument above?
Show more


However, many times the question stems are specific. E.g.
Quote:
Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for Country Y’s policy of buying scrap iron abroad?
Show more

In the second question, our job is to support the policy.
User avatar
AnishPassi
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2014
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
661
Given Kudos: 18
Status:GMAT Coach
Affiliations: The GMAT Co.
Concentration: Strategy
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: IIMA  (A)
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V41
Posts: 112
Kudos: 661
Springfield Fire Commissioner: The vast majority of false fire alarms 25 Jan 2022, 03:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Abhishek009
guhabhishek
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?


Powerscore CR Bible states for Strengthens Questions suing the following steps -

1. Identify the conclusion - Therefore, we propose to remove the boxes.
2. Personalize the argument - Removing the alarm boxes will reduce prank calls , however the fire incidents are reported by private telephones.
3. Look for weakness in the argument - Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls but it will hamper people’s ability to report a fire.

Now check the options -

4. Argument of analogy/surveys - strengthen the analogy
5. Correct argument will strengthen the argument just a Little / Lot

Quote:
(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 $5 million 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.


The fire department traces all alarm calls made from private telephones and( false alarm calls can be reduced) records where they came from ( Functions as an alarm Box)

Hence correct Answer is (A)
Show more

That’s a very tricky slope. You missed an extremely important component in your explanation above: The Question Stem!

You've mentioned what the book states for "Strengthen Questions".

I have no issue with what the book might have said. I have an issue with trying to answer a question category instead of the specific question asked.

The question:
Quote:
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that the proposal, if carried out, will have the announced effect?
Show more

"supports" means strengthens, no doubt.

But, support what?
The claim.

What claim?
That the proposal will have the announced effect.

What’s the proposal?
Remove the alarm boxes

What’s the announced effect?
Removing will "reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire"

So, what's the claim that needs to be supported?
Removing the boxes will reduce the number of prank calls without hampering people's ability to report a fire.

The question stem already tells us exactly what needs to be strengthened.


Be careful:
Quote:
1. Identify the conclusion - Therefore, we propose to remove the boxes.
Show more

This is not the statement that needs to be strengthened here.

****

Many times the question stems are generic. E.g.:
Quote:
Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the argument above?
Show more


However, many times the question stems are specific. E.g.
Quote:
Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for Country Y’s policy of buying scrap iron abroad?
Show more

In the second question, our job is to support the policy. That’s it.
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts