vikasp99 wrote:
The highest-ranking detectives in the city's police department are also the most adept at solving crimes. Yet in each of the past ten years, the average success rate for the city's highest-ranking detectives in solving criminal cases has been no higher than the average success rate for its lowest-ranking detectives.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent paradox?
(A) The detectives who have the highest success rate in solving criminal cases are those who have worked as detectives the longest.
(B) It generally takes at least ten years for a detective to rise from the lowest to the highest ranks of the city's detective force.
(C) Those detectives in the police department who are the most adept at solving criminal cases are also those most likely to remain in the police department.
(D) The police department generally gives the criminal cases that it expects to be the easiest to solve to its lowest-ranking detectives.
(E) None of the lowest-ranking detectives in the police department had experience in solving criminal cases prior to joining the police department.
Dear
vikasp99,
This is a great question, and I am happy to help.
The highest-ranking detectives are the best at solving cases, but their success rate is no higher than the lowest ranking cases. For this paradox question, it's not hard to guess the answer---maybe the highest-ranking detectives are working on harder cases, and the lowest-ranking detectives get the easiest cases. That would explain why they had comparable success rates.
(A)
The detectives who have the highest success rate in solving criminal cases are those who have worked as detectives the longest.We might suspect this is true, but it doesn't help us figure out why these experience detectives don't outperform the novices. This is incorrect.
(B)
It generally takes at least ten years for a detective to rise from the lowest to the highest ranks of the city's detective force.Again, interesting, but doesn't resolve the paradox. This is incorrect.
(C)
Those detectives in the police department who are the most adept at solving criminal cases are also those most likely to remain in the police department.This would mean there's relatively low turnover among the highest-ranking folks, and high turnover among the lowest-ranking, but this still doesn't explain why the success rates would be the same. This is incorrect.
(D)
The police department generally gives the criminal cases that it expects to be the easiest to solve to its lowest-ranking detectives.Bingo! As predicted!
(E)
None of the lowest-ranking detectives in the police department had experience in solving criminal cases prior to joining the police department.Not surprising, but doesn't explain why folks with no experience would do so well. This is incorrect.
Choice
(D) is what we predicted and it's the only possible answer.
Mike