The report suggests that in some cases radiation levels might have an

Hi faamir,

E is preferred to B because "higher" goes with "than". "Higher .... than ..." is a correct idiom.

Hope it helps.

I was stuck between B and E. Can someone please explain why 'compared to' is incorrect and we have to use 'than?

Hi,

Even i have chosen B over E, but now when you re-read and try to understand the meaning of the sentence,it is actually comparing the adaptation of rodents and insects not the radiation levels.
In that sense, E is the right ans.

Regards
Sony

IMHO this is a question presenting contrasting features rather than a comparison between to dissimilar objects...

Compared to - Used to show similarity between 2 things/objects that are not alike

rodents and insects in areas with higher radiation exposure may show greater adaptation,and thus less genetic damage, compared to areas with lower radiation levels.

in areas with higher radiation..... than ... in areas with lower radiation

Hence IMHO (E) over (B)
_________________

I have one question.

Is comma after damage really necessary?

The comma after damage is part of the parenthetical phrase in two commas namely, ',and thus less genetic damage,'.It does not really intrude into the meaning of the main clause. if the comma is removed, then the modifier will turn essential and will distort the meaning.
_________________

E it is.... Comparison is between rodents in areas with high radiation and those in low radiation area. Its is between B and E. In B , however use of "compared to" is wrong because you already have a superlative term "greater".
_________________

Why are they taking into consideration only "Compared to" and placing it before areas?
This entire part "B. compared to those in areas with lower radiation levels" should be placed and checked.

aragonn, broall, generis, hazelnut, Vyshak, VeritasKarishma, VeritasPrepBrian


The findings also suggest that in some cases radiation levels might have an inverse effect — birds in areas with higher radiation exposure may show greater adaptation, and thus less genetic damage, than those in areas with lower radiation levels.

What I understand is that answer choice E is correct because of - correct usage of - greater ....than.

Am I missing any other decision point for selecting Choice E over Choice B?


Also if we have the question prompt as below :

The report suggests that in some cases radiation levels might have an inverse effect — rodents and insects in areas with higher radiation exposure may show unique adaptability, and thus less genetic damage, compared to areas with lower radiation levels.

(A) compared to areas with lower radiation levels
(B) compared to those in areas with lower radiation levels
(C) as those with lower radiation levels in their area
(D) than areas with lower radiation levels
(E) than those in areas with lower radiation levels

Is answer choice B correct for this modified question?

If so then -

The report suggests that in some cases radiation levels might have an inverse effect — rodents and insects in areas with higher radiation exposure may show unique adaptability, and thus less genetic damage, compared to those in areas with lower radiation levels.

A) compared to those in areas with lower radiation levels

or

B) compared with those in areas with lower radiation levels

Here for this modified question prompt are both choices A) and B) acceptable ?

Am I correct to say that the selection between Compared to and Compared with is not expected to be the testing point on GMAT?
_________________

siddharthfrancis , I am not sure I understand what you mean.


The authors are not taking into consideration only "compared to areas," except in option A.

Option A is wrong for a couple of reasons, one of which I believe you caught. Option (A) compares rodents and insects with areas.

There is nothing special about option A.
Option A does not signal the correct or intended meaning of the sentence.

If I have misunderstood your question, please add more detail?

Placed where? (I assume that you mean in the sentence.)
Checked by whom? (I assume that you mean by the person reading the question.)
For what purpose?

Further, is your assertion about B connected to your question about A?

The good news: you have isolated a specific issue.
A poster who asks specific questions or isolates specific issues makes the process of responding MUCH easier.

The not-great news: I cannot understand what you mean.
If you have a particular construction in mind, I recommend that you write the construction as you want it to be considered.

I think the sentence below represents the structure you advise. I inserted option (B) into the sentence.

(B) The report suggests that in some cases radiation levels might have an inverse effect — rodents and insects in areas with higher radiation exposure may show greater adaptation, and thus less genetic damage, compared to those in areas with lower radiation levels.

At this point, what is your issue? Why? What is the outcome of your analysis?

I sense that you are focused on a potentially helpful distinction, but too many possibilities exist for me to hazard a guess.
If you rewrite your queries and use a tag, I will do my best to answer.
_________________

EDITED
Harshgmat , as usual, good questions.


Yes, but the general rule is not very well-known.

In addition to the lack of "than" in choice B that you note correctly —
Reject choice (B) because it includes BOTH "compared to" and the comparative adjectives "greater" and "less."

That construction is considered redundant most of the time.
The words "greater" and "less" already imply comparison.

That is, if we have a comparative adjective or word, almost always we should not include "compared to/with."*

I think you knew that fact, though; your hypothetical sentence appears to be an attempt to eliminate the need for "than."

Probably. The official sentence closest to this construction that I have seen is this one about U.S. immigrants.

I am dubious, though, because GMAC frequently tests concision in comparisons. And concision depends on context.

In this question about minivans, concision is achieved by using "compared" instead of "than."

But in this question about hotel rooms, "than" is better than "compared."

Concision is not the only thing being tested, but in the minivan and many other questions, concision is an important factor.

So yes, your sentence is possible. (B) inserted:

...rodents and insects in areas with higher radiation exposure may show unique adaptability, and thus less genetic damage, compared to those in areas with lower radiation levels.
-- I think there are issues with the comma after "adaptability," and perhaps also issues with the word "those."
It's logically clear that the referents are the rodents and the insects, but the descriptors are unwieldy.
-- "Those" would be better spelled out.

I'm confused by the question about inserting option A or B into your hypothetical sentence.
It seems that you rewrote (A). But that question (A or B?) and the next are similar in thrust, so . . .

You are correct.

According to many seasoned experts, GMAC ignores the very traditional (read: old school) distinction between "compared to" and "compared with."

Both constructions may show up in different options. I have yet to see a question in which the difference made a difference. Other errors determined the answer.

I am glad you mentioned the issue. Please see the expert sources in the second footnote.

Hope that helps.


*See, e.g., Magoosh, Complete Guide to GMAT Idioms on page 10: "The GMAT does not like the words 'compared to' or 'compared with' combined with other comparative words [e.g. comparative adjectives]."

See also:
If a comparative word is present, "compared to/with" is redundant. AND
"Compared to" is redundant in a sentence that already contains a comparative word.

**
Manhattan Prep: "The GMAT ignores the traditional distinction between compared to and compared with." Sentence Correction, 6th ed., p.223
Three experts who have taught GMAT prep for a decade or more agree.
• GMATGuruNY,HERE
• Ron Purewal, here
• Payal Tandon, HERE
_________________

Here's the official explanation:

In any comparison question such as this, you should always establish the goal of the comparison: ask yourself what is being compared. Here you are trying to compare the effect of radiation (greater adaptation and less genetic damage) on rodents and insects in higher radiation areas with rodents and insects in lower radiation level areas. Only (E) makes the proper comparison. (A) and (B) use the incorrect expression “greater…compared to”— this is redundant and unidiomatic (when you use the word “greater” a comparison is already implied!). (C) uses the incorrect comparison idiom “greater as” and also uses the awkward and illogical “in their area”. (D) makes an improper comparison as you cannot compare the “rodents and insects” with “areas” (E) uses the proper “greater than” idiom and makes the proper “apple to apple” comparison. Correct answer is (E).

Double comparison marker in one statement is wrong. A and B are out.
We are comparing rodents in area with X to rodents in area with Y.
Pronoun "those" is acceptable form for rodents.

E is correct.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________