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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
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
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.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
100%
(01:11)
correct 0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 18
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Two years ago, the number of people involved in car accidents in Terribilia was 345. Last year, the number increased to 435 people. We can conclude that the number of people involved in car accidents is on an upward trend and the number will be even higher this year.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above conclusion?
(A) Last year, Terribilia experienced its first ever chain accident, in which almost a hundred people were involved.
(B) The number of people involved in car accidents in Terribilia has been steadily increasing over the past decade.
(C) Three years ago, the number of people involved in car accidents in Terriblia was 521.
(D) 58% of the people who were involved in car accidents last year in Terribilia sustained minor injuries only.
(E) The number of people involved in work-related accidents in Terriblia has remained the same in the past two years.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Two years ago, the number of people involved in car accidents in Terribilia was 345. Last year, the number increased to 435 people. We can conclude that the number of people involved in car accidents is on an upward trend and the number will be even higher this year.
Two years back the people involved in car accident cases were 345 Last year, the people involved in car accident cases were 435. This year accident cases will be higher. (The conclusion)
The statement streghthening the conclusion is
(A) Last year, Terribilia experienced its first ever chain accident, in which almost a hundred people were involved. (If 100 out of 435 were in same accident, that means the no. Of cases at the most will be 336 which means there were few cases of car accident than last to last year, which is weakening the argument) (incorrect)
(B) The number of people involved in car accidents in Terribilia has been steadily increasing over the past decade. ( can be the rmsteady reason to show that the graph is increasing from past decade) ((((could Be the reason))))
(C) Three years ago, the number of people involved in car accidents in Terriblia was 521.(this shows the no. of people involved in car accident decreased next year so no confirmation regarding the accident will increase this year or not) (incorrect)
(D) 58% of the people who were involved in car accidents last year in Terribilia sustained minor injuries only. (This is weaking the argument as its showing that the majority people suffer minor injuries only, which means this year car accident cases could also result in minor injuries) (incorrect)
(E) The number of people involved in work-related accidents in Terriblia has remained the same in the past two years.(nothing mentioned regarding work related injuries, invalid) (Incorrect)
Two years ago, the number of people involved in car accidents in Terribilia was 345. Last year, the number increased to 435 people. We can conclude that the number of people involved in car accidents is on an upward trend and the number will be even higher this year.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the above conclusion?
(A) Last year, Terribilia experienced its first ever chain accident, in which almost a hundred people were involved.
(B) The number of people involved in car accidents in Terribilia has been steadily increasing over the past decade.
(C) Three years ago, the number of people involved in car accidents in Terriblia was 521.
(D) 58% of the people who were involved in car accidents last year in Terribilia sustained minor injuries only.
(E) The number of people involved in work-related accidents in Terriblia has remained the same in the past two years.
(A) Last year, Terribilia experienced its first ever chain accident, in which almost a hundred people were involved. -- First ever chain accident cannot help us prove that the number of accidents will continue to increase -- OUT
(B) The number of people involved in car accidents in Terribilia has been steadily increasing over the past decade. -- CORRECT , its showing accidents are increasing and there is a upward trend in accidents
(C) Three years ago, the number of people involved in car accidents in Terriblia was 521.-- This is a kind of weakener because it is showing that 3 yrs ago number of accidents were more and from argument if you see 2 yrs ago accidents were 345, its showing that accidents trend went in downward direction -- OUT
(D) 58% of the people who were involved in car accidents last year in Terribilia sustained minor injuries only.--Minor injuries cannot explain the accident trend -- OUT
(E) The number of people involved in work-related accidents in Terriblia has remained the same in the past two years.--Argument is not concerned about work related accident - OUT OF SCOPE
This is nothing like a real GMAT CR question. For one thing, the argument in the stem has essentially no support. It looks at two numbers, and infers a trend. If you're willing to infer a trend from two numbers, you'll find trends 100% of the time - two numbers either increase, decrease, or stay the same. In every case, you'd think there's a trend, even if the numbers were generated randomly.
So all we really have from the stem is a claim: accidents are increasing. We want to strengthen that claim, and the right answer, B, says, essentially, "accidents are increasing". Naturally that "strengthens" the conclusion, since it precisely is the conclusion. That doesn't happen in real GMAT CR questions; in a real question, we'd find some explanation of why accidents might continue to increase. Maybe they're devoting fewer and fewer police hours to enforcing speed limits, or maybe traffic signs are falling over and aren't being replaced, or maybe the roads are deteriorating and aren't being fixed. Those are the kinds of answers I'd expect in a real question, information that would make us more certain the increase will continue. There's really no way to be sure of the prediction in the stem here, that accidents will continue to increase - why are we sure we aren't at a plateau?
So I don't think the question is worthwhile, but the only candidate answer is B. If A is true, and some fluke "chain accident" accounts for the big increase last year, we wouldn't have reason to think there's an upward trend. C suggests that accident numbers are going up and down, so contradicts the predicted trend. Injuries and work-related accidents are completely irrelevant so D and E are also wrong.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.