Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 14:32 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 14:32
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 
805+ Level|   Assumption|      
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
77,000
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 77,000
 [1]
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance c 25 Apr 2022, 22:02
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
THIS9
I completely understand why E is an assumption that the argument relies on. However, wouldn't A also be an essential assumption?

if A is not true, i.e. [driver error is one factor in some/most car accidents], then it becomes possible to attribute the occurrence of a car accident to driver error (say, he was distracted) and thus the "ONLY THEN" conclusion of the argument is broken i.e. [taking measures to make drivers to be more alert and make less errors can also help prevent accidents]

Experts kindly tell me what I'm missing.

GMATNinja, KarishmaB
Show more

We are given:
"try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in ... and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. "

So the argument does believe that accidents could be drivers' fault because they received their license inspite of not being fully fit & trained for the road. So driver error could be a significant factor in accidents. The argument is not assuming that driver error is not a significant factor. So (A) is not an assumption.
The argument says that to prevent future accidents, we may need to retrain the drivers (they may need to take stringent license tests). Just punishing them may not be enough.
User avatar
THIS9
User avatar
Joined: 14 Feb 2022
Last visit: 07 Jul 2023
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
4
Given Kudos: 37
Location: Canada
Posts: 15
Kudos: 4
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance c 26 Apr 2022, 04:32
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
THIS9
I completely understand why E is an assumption that the argument relies on. However, wouldn't A also be an essential assumption?

if A is not true, i.e. [driver error is one factor in some/most car accidents], then it becomes possible to attribute the occurrence of a car accident to driver error (say, he was distracted) and thus the "ONLY THEN" conclusion of the argument is broken i.e. [taking measures to make drivers to be more alert and make less errors can also help prevent accidents]

Experts kindly tell me what I'm missing.

GMATNinja, KarishmaB

We are given:
"try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in ... and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. "

So the argument does believe that accidents could be drivers' fault because they received their license inspite of not being fully fit & trained for the road. So driver error could be a significant factor in accidents. The argument is not assuming that driver error is not a significant factor. So (A) is not an assumption.
The argument says that to prevent future accidents, we may need to retrain the drivers (they may need to take stringent license tests). Just punishing them may not be enough.
Show more

I don't know how I missed that. It's not an "either or" situation with driver error vs. other factors, but actually looking deeper into the specific causes of the driver error. So "driver error" is significant enough to warrant further investigation is a given in the argument. Thank you for the clarification!
User avatar
Kushchokhani
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2020
Last visit: 03 Apr 2024
Posts: 513
Own Kudos:
645
Given Kudos: 692
Status:Admitted to IIM Shillong (PGPEx 2023-24)
Affiliations: CFA Institute; ICAI; BCAS
Location: India
WE 2: EA to CFO (Consumer Products)
GPA: 3.78
WE:Corporate Finance (Commercial Banking)
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 513
Kudos: 645
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance c 31 May 2022, 08:56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
ananthpatri
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

Which of the following is a presupposition of the argument above?

A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents.
B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies.
C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer.
D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents.
E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.

Responding to a pm:

I am not happy with both (D) and (E).

Here is the argument:
Insurance companies blame drivers for accidents and punish them.
Instead, they should try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license.

Conclusion: Investigation of roads, automobiles and drivers is necessary to issue guidelines to prevent future accidents.

(D) is not an assumption. "Investigation of automobile accidents" is too generic. We don't know what it means. Even if we assume that it means "try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road...", we are already given this. We are given that "investigation" is necessary to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents.

(E) is a little far fetched. The argument presupposes that people who make driving errors may not be eligible to drive i.e. they may be bad drivers and may need retraining. Now we don't know whether those drivers repeat those errors, commit other errors or other drivers commit the same errors. All the argument is saying is that we will not be able to prevent accidents by punishing the drivers alone.
Show more
KarishmaB

Is it that conclusion and OA of this ques differs from the conclusion of a similar ques just because of use of the term "For" in that other ques?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
77,000
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 77,000
 [1]
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance c 31 May 2022, 21:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Kushchokhani
KarishmaB
ananthpatri
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

Which of the following is a presupposition of the argument above?

A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents.
B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies.
C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer.
D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents.
E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.

Responding to a pm:

I am not happy with both (D) and (E).

Here is the argument:
Insurance companies blame drivers for accidents and punish them.
Instead, they should try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license.

Conclusion: Investigation of roads, automobiles and drivers is necessary to issue guidelines to prevent future accidents.

(D) is not an assumption. "Investigation of automobile accidents" is too generic. We don't know what it means. Even if we assume that it means "try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road...", we are already given this. We are given that "investigation" is necessary to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents.

(E) is a little far fetched. The argument presupposes that people who make driving errors may not be eligible to drive i.e. they may be bad drivers and may need retraining. Now we don't know whether those drivers repeat those errors, commit other errors or other drivers commit the same errors. All the argument is saying is that we will not be able to prevent accidents by punishing the drivers alone.
KarishmaB

Is it that conclusion and OA of this ques differs from the conclusion of a similar ques just because of use of the term "For" in that other ques?
Show more

Yes, the term 'for' means 'because' in that case which makes what follows a premise. We take the premise to be true. Then we have a conclusion based on a premise and there would be some assumptions involved. Hence the airline question makes sense. This is its structure:
The premise tells you that only when you do X, will future accidents be avoided. The conclusion says that investigators should do X.
The assumption is that investigators should help in preventing future accidents. That is why the author asks them to do X.

This question (on automobile accidents) seems to give the argument made up of opinions only. This is the structure of the argument: Instead of doing A, they should do B. Only then will they be able to do C.
Hence, it isn't working out here.
User avatar
wickedvikram
User avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Last visit: 16 Oct 2024
Posts: 175
Own Kudos:
106
Given Kudos: 79
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 175
Kudos: 106
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance c 02 Jun 2023, 22:59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ananthpatri
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance companies should first try to figure out why the error was made by analyzing flaws in road design, automobile designs and in criteria to determine eligibility for a driver's license. Only then will the insurance companies be able to effectively issue guidelines to prevent future accidents, instead of merely punishing the incidental driver.

Which of the following is a presupposition of the argument above?
Show more


Premise- Don't blame driver error, Do RCA of error by analyzing Road design, Auto design and eligibility criteria
Conclusion - Be able to Effectively issue guidelines to prevent accidents, punishing driver is not effective.
Jump - By not focusing on driver's fault but on design & eligibility process flaws accident prevention guidelines can be issued

Quote:

(A) Driver error is not a significant factor in most automobile accidents.
Show more
Even if the driver error is significant factor, analyzing error would give the same conclusion

Quote:

(B) Automobile manufacturers should be the agents who investigate automobile accidents and not insurance companies.
Show more
Doesn't affect the conclusion

Quote:

(C) Stricter government regulation of the automobile and highway construction industries would make automobile travel safer.
Show more
Govt Regulation doesn't affect prevention through guidelines

Quote:

(D) Investigation of automobile accidents should contribute to the prevention of future accidents.
Show more
Firstly, Investigation of an accident may or may not mean analysis. I think, Investigation doesn't cover analysis of designs and eligibility criteria.
Investigation of accident may result in need for analysis, which will use multiple accidents as samples.

Secondly, the current form of Investigation, against the driver error, is probably contributing to prevention. Argument states that it is not contributing to effective guidelines. Not effective doesn't mean no contribution.

Quote:

(E) Most drivers who make errors in driving repeat those errors unless they are retrained.
Show more

This statement says that except retraining any action on reducing driver error is pointless.
drivers will keep repeating those errors, so focus on something else i.e. analyze to issue guidelines
but connecting road & vehicle analysis and DL criteria to retraining drivers is another assumption.

Negation 1 - Drivers repeat errors even with retraining
Conclusion - Issuing guidelines can still be effective
Negation 2 - Driver doesn't repeat errors without retraining
Conclusion - Issuing guidelines is not required
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,829
Own Kudos:
986
Posts: 18,829
Kudos: 986
Instead of blaming an automobile accident on driver error, insurance c 24 Jul 2024, 01:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts