The decision to ban the use of hands-free mobile phone headsets while

Question

The decision to ban the use of hands-free mobile phone headsets while driving is not justified. There is no doubt that mobile phone use while driving is distracting and dangerous. However, it is dangerous because drivers use their hands and eyes to operate the phone, when their full physical attention should be on the road. Hands-free technologies allow for mobile phone use without such distractions, and these options should remain legal.

Which of the following, if true, undermines the argument above?

(A) The functioning of the eyes and the hands is governed by the brain and there is considerable evidence to show that the use of mobile phones distracts the brain. 
(B) Most good quality hands-free headsets are expensive which will discourage people from buying them. 
(C) Just because something is legal does not necessarily mean that it is safe. 
(D) There have been some incidents of road accidents involving drivers who were talking on the mobile phones using hands-free technology while driving at the time of the accident. 
(E) There are other technologies available, such as the use of Bluetooth to connect one’s mobile phone to the car’s speaker system, that are much safer than the use of handsfree devices.

J2S2019 · Answer

GMATNinja ,
I could not able to figure out what is wrong with D here? OA is A, but in A the result is co-related with the use of Mobile phones but not headsets? If it have a relationship with headsets than undermining the argument with option A will be a good option whereas in option D, we can see a direct consequence of mobile headset using while driving can result in an accident.

Could you please help me understanding why D is wrong?

deepshikha12 · Answer

Conclusion: Option to drive with hand free phone should be legal, given:
a) mobile phone use - distracting and dangerous
b) But, dangerous because drivers use hands and eyes to operate the phone
because hand free will be hand free, so allow legal.

hmm, well while hand free, will be hand free, what will happen when a call comes, does the driver get distract then ?

POE:

(A) The functioning of the eyes and the hands is governed by the brain and there is considerable evidence to show that the use of mobile phones distracts the brain. - hmm.. so the regular phone is an issue since it distract, does the hand free in any way can distract as well. This choice give out that point of distraction which can be considered dangerous and hence weakens the conclusion by attacking one of the premises. 
(B) Most good quality hands-free headsets are expensive which will discourage people from buying them. - cost is not a concern 
(C) Just because something is legal does not necessarily mean that it is safe. - ok but too generic
(D) There have been some incidents of road accidents involving drivers who were talking on the mobile phones using hands-free technology while driving at the time of the accident. - be careful with words, such as, "some", "most"; both words mean "not all", so not consistent to opt 
(E) There are other technologies available, such as the use of Bluetooth to connect one’s mobile phone to the car’s speaker system, that are much safer than the use of handsfree devices. - Out of scope, we are not discussion "other tech"

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

The right answer here should be  A . We are looking to weaken the conclusion, which means that we should suggest that hands-free should not be legal.

A  - The main premise offered in support of using hands-free is that the use of hands and eyes is eliminated, thereby allowing full attention. But this point clearly undermines that evidence, since it suggests that the use of phones actually affects the user at the common source of problem, the brain. This therefore clearly undermines the argument and is  CORRECT .

B  - This has nothing to do with the argument, we care about whether it should be legal.  OUT

C  - If anything, this supports the argument. If something need not be safe to be legal, then this supports keeping hands-free legal.  OUT

D  - This is the  trap  answer. It shows a link between people using hands-free when they had an accident. But as any STAT101 student can tell you,  correlation does NOT mean causation . All we know is that these two things happened at the same time.  We DONT know that hands free actually caused the problem . Hence, this doesn't undermine the argument and is  OUT

E  - The fact that there are safer techs doesn't mean that this should be illegal. A 780 on the GMAT is better than a 720, but this does not make a 720 bad.  OUT

Hope this helped!

- Matoo

Bunuel · Answer

Official Explanation

Answer: A

The argument assumes that a driver will be able to use his hands and eyes unhindered if he uses a hands-free headset. A weakens this by suggesting that this will not be the case because the use of mobile phone distracts the brain, that will in turn distract the hands and eyes because the brain controls their functioning.

(A) The correct answer.

(B) The price is outside the scope of the argument. The question is whether the use of hands-free headsets should be allowed at all.

(C) True, but to weaken the argument, we have to show how the use of hands-free headsets is unsafe.

(D) The operative word here is some. There could be other reasons for these accidents as well, such as over-speeding or carelessness of the pedestrians.

(E) The availability of other technologies is outside the scope. The question is whether the use of hands-free headsets is safe or not.

kntombat · Answer

AndrewN , I know that D isn't the perfect answer and like  Bunuel , the word "some" also made me question the efficacy of this option, could you point why answer A is a better option, it doesn't talk about using hands-free mobile phone headsets and just talks about how the "The functioning of the eyes and the hands is governed by the brain and there is considerable evidence to show that the use of mobile phones distracts the brain." I chose D on these basis that A makes a jump to conclude that using mobiles via hands free headsets is as distracting as using the actual mobile itself while driving and if this jump is fine then shouldn't answer D be right ?

AndrewN · Answer

Yes,  kntombat ,  some  is a word that warrants caution in a CR or RC question.  Some  could refer to just two. (I discuss the issue much more in depth in  this post .) Would it really undermine the argument if two drivers had crashed while using the hands-free technology? No. You are pursuing a could-be-true line of reasoning instead. Notice, too, how  considerable  in choice (A) operates. If there is  considerable  evidence, not just  some  evidence, that using mobile phones  distracts the brain , which governs hand-eye coordination, then using a mobile phone in an automobile is a dangerous action, period, with or without hands-free technology. The linear logic is that  the use of mobile phones distracts the brain , and the very argument we are setting out to debunk is based on hands-free technologies allowing  for mobile phone use without... distractions . In other words, the earlier claim that  mobile phone use while driving is distracting and dangerous  appears justified. The brain simply cannot allow the body to perform the way it should when a driver is using a mobile phone.

I hope that helps. Thank you for calling my attention to the question.

- Andrew

mkeshri185 · Answer

I dont get why A is the answer. A says using hands and eyes while driving distract us bcz they distract our brain that's why we should not use hands and eyes while driving> this is the main point of A option. You can't just break the sentence and say one part belongs to one meaning and the other to other meaning.

It just says use of hands and eyes distract us and our brain. That is why Hands free should be made legal bcz if it will be hands free then the driver wont need to use hands or eyes while driving leading to safe driving so it should be made legal.

miag · Answer

Hi,

I think you are misunderstanding what the option is saying. A does not say "hands and eyes are what distract the brain."
 It says:
 
 hands/eyes are controlled by the brain 
 evidence shows phone use distracts the brain  
So the point is:  distraction is cognitive, not just physical . Therefore, this implies that hands-free isn’t necessarily safe too and the ban on it is justified.

Hope this helps clarify!

The decision to ban the use of hands-free mobile phone headsets while

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

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The decision to ban the use of hands-free mobile phone headsets while

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

My Rewards