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

Question

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 areas with lower radiation levels.

(A) compared to areas with lower radiation levels
(B) compared to those in 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

My question is here regarding the usage of compared to.
When is compared to used and is this usage in sentence B acceptable.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/06/science/nature-adapts-to-chernobyl.html

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, t han those in areas with lower radiation levels .

LucyDang · Accepted Answer

Hi faamir,

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

Hope it helps.

faamir · Answer

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

sony26 · Answer

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

Abhishek009 · Answer

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)

Aves · Answer

I have one question.

Is comma after damage really necessary?

daagh · Answer

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.

spetznaz · Answer

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".

_________________

" The few , the fearless "

Signature Read More

siddharthfrancis · Answer

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.

Helium · Answer

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 greater adaptation, 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

(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 greater adaptation, 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

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?

generis · Answer

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.

generis · 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 ." 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

dcummins · Answer

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).

gvij2017 · Answer

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.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

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

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

GMAT Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

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

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia