Motor-scooter dealers attribute a drastic decline in sales over the

Question

﻿Motor-scooter dealers attribute a drastic decline in sales over the last few years to a new law requiring motor-scooter riders to wear helmets. Previously, helmets had been obligatory for motorcycle riders but not for motor-scooter riders-a difference that the dealers argue made scooters preferable for many customers. Safety advocates, however, dispute the dealers' explanation, pointing out that the law's introduction coincided with a large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance for both types of vehicle.

In evaluating the safety advocates' and the dealers' explanations, it would be most helpful to know which of the following?

A. Whether there were any motor-scooter riders who regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so
B. Whether the cost of mandatory insurance for other motor vehicles has increased at the same rate as the insurance cost for motor scooters and motorcycles
C. How the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles
D. How sales of imported motor scooters have changed compared with sales of domestically produced models
E. How sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed over the period that scooter sales have declined

MartyMurray · Accepted Answer

Motor-scooter dealers attribute a drastic decline in sales over the last few years to a new law requiring motor-scooter riders to wear helmets. Previously, helmets had been obligatory for motorcycle riders but not for motor-scooter riders-a difference that the dealers argue made scooters preferable for many customers. Safety advocates, however, dispute the dealers' explanation, pointing out that the law's introduction coincided with a large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance for both types of vehicle.

In evaluating the safety advocates' and the dealers' explanations, it would be most helpful to know which of the following?

In evaluating the safety advocates' and the dealers' explanations, it would be most helpful to know which of the following?

Information that helps with evaluating an explanation will support or cast doubt on that explanation. So, we're looking for the choice that names information that would support or cast doubt on the explanations, and since we have two different explanations, the information will probably support one while casting doubt on the other.

A. Whether there were any motor-scooter riders who regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so

Knowing this would not help with evaluating the argument.

After all, regardless of whether there were "any" motor-scooter riders who regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so, the law could still have affected most motor-scooter riders, who went from not having to wear helmets if they rode motor-scooters to having to wear helmets.

In other words, "any motor-scooter riders" could be a tiny percentage of motor-scooter riders, in which case, the helmet law would still have made a difference to the vast majority of motor-scooter riders.

Eliminate.

B. Whether the cost of mandatory insurance for other motor vehicles has increased at the same rate as the insurance cost for motor scooters and motorcycles

Notice that this choice mentions "the same rate." "The same rate" is just one specific thing, a rate that is the same.

Having information on whether the cost increased at "the same rate" wouldn't help.

After all, if the cost of insurance for other motor vehicles has increased at the same rate as that for motor scooters and motorcycles, then it still could be the case that people became less inclined to buy motor scooters because of either the helmet law or the increase in the insurance rate. Maybe people just didn't feel like spending the money, or maybe they didn't want to wear helmets.

Alternatively, if the cost of insurance for other motor vehicles has not increased at the same rate, we have no idea about what happened with that cost. Did it increase? Decrease? Remain the same? We don't know.

So, this information either makes no difference or has unclear implications.

Eliminate.

C. How the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles

Knowing this would not help with evaluating the argument. Here's why.

Presumably, the accident rates for motor scooters and motorcycles would have remained about the same over time, or at least haven't suddenly changed "drastically." So, how the two rates compare has likely remained about the same over time as well.

Something that remains about the same would not explain or cause a new change such as a "drastic decline." In fact, it's useful for CR to keep in mind that, in general, something that remains the same will not be the cause of a new change.

So, knowing how the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles would not help in evaluating the argument since that comparison would not be an alternative cause for the "drastic decline in sales over the last few years."

Thus, regardless of how the two accident rates compare, that information would not be reason to believe or not believe the safety advocates' and the dealers' explanations.

Eliminate.

D. How sales of imported motor scooters have changed compared with sales of domestically produced models

Regardless of how sales of imported motor scooters have changed compared with sales of domestically produced models, it's still the case that, after the helmet law came into existence and insurance rates increased, overall sales of motor scooters declined. So, having the information mentioned by this choice would not really change what we know about the scenario.

Eliminate.

E. How sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed over the period that scooter sales have declined

Having this information would help us to evaluate the argument. Here's how.

Motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters are products similar to motor scooters.

Also, we know from the passage that insurance rates have increased for both motor cycles and motor scooters.

On the other hand, the helmet law change applies to motor scooters only.

Let's consider some ways sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters could have changed.

Increased - In this case, sales of motor scooters have declined while sales of similarly priced motorcycles have increased. That information would tend to confirm that the helmet law made the difference since the increase in insurance rates didn't cause the sales of motorcycles to decline.

Remained the same - In this case, we have a situation similar to the one in which sales of motorcycles increased. Sales of motor scooters have declined while sales of similarly priced motorcycles have remained the same. That information would tend to confirm that the helmet law made the difference since the increase in insurance rates didn't cause the sales of motorcycles to decline.

Decreased - In this case, sales of motorcycles have declined just as sales of scooters have. That information would support the conclusion that the increase in insurance cost caused the decline in motor-scooter sales since both motor-scooter sales and also motorcycle sales declined at the same time, the change in insurance costs affected them both, and the helmet law affected only motor scooters.

We can see that having this information helps us to determine which explanation is correct.

The correct answer is (E).

gmatophobia · Answer

Reason for a drastic decline in ﻿Motor-scooter sales in the over the last few years

﻿Motor-scooter dealers   → The decline in sales is due to a new law requiring motor-scooter riders to wear helmets.

﻿Safety advocates   → The decline in sales is due to the cost of mandatory insurance for both types of vehicles.

Answer Choice Elimination

A. Whether there were  any  motor-scooter riders who regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so

Knowing this information is irrelevant. We need to find a statement, the answer to which will provide us with information disprove one of the hypotheses.

B. Whether the cost of mandatory insurance for other motor vehicles has increased at the same rate as the insurance cost for motor scooters and motorcycles

Not relevant. The argument presented is in reference to motor-scooter and motorcycles. Hence, knowing whether the cost of mandatory insurance for other motor vehicles has increased won't help us evaluate the argument.

C. How the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles

While this statement compares information regarding motor scooters to motorcycles, the answer to the question barely touches the conclusion that we are trying to resolve. Hence, we can eliminate this option.

D. How sales of imported motor scooters have changed compared with sales of domestically produced models

Not relevant for one reason we don't know if the rules apply any differently or if the insurance rates are any different for the two categories. Also, the option doesn't provide us any information to evaluate whether the decline in sales was due to the new law or due to the rise in insurance costs. Hence, we can eliminate this option.

E. How sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed over the period that scooter sales have declined

Bang on! We know that the insurance costs increased for both types of vehicles. Hence, if the sales of motorcycles that are close in the purchase price to motor scooters increased, we can conclude that the decline in motor-scooter sales was not due to high insurance costs because buyers were ready to bear similar costs while buying motorcycles. Hence, the conclusion put forth by the motor-scooter dealers holds is more likely correct. 
On the other hand, if the sales of motorcycles that are close in the purchase price to motorscooters decreased, the information does give us a reason the believe that a large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance was the cause of the decrease in the sale of motor-scooters as well. In such a scenario, the conclusion put forward by safety advocates is more likely to be true. Hence, this statement helps evaluate the safety advocates' and the dealers' explanations.

Option E

Engineer1 · Answer

Please critique my reason for eliminating C.

How the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles

1. If accident rate of motor-scooters > motorcycles: Probably the sales did not reduce due to helmet law. Instead it may have happened because of the accident rate.
2. If accident rate of motor-scooters < motorcycles: Still it does not give us a definitive answer whether or not the motor-scooter sales declined due to introduction of helmet law.
3. If accident rate of motor-scooters = motorcycles: Same as above

A correct answer choice should have two paths. If yes - it will make the argument more valid (strengthen). It sort of strengthens the argument of the safety advocate. (But I am not sure about my thought process here - Insurance may have increased because of increased accident rate. But then insurance has increased for both types of vehicles.)

If not, it will weaken the argument. 2 & 3 neither weaken nor strengthen the argument.

Therefore, C is the wrong answer.

Appreciate an answer.

MartyMurray · Answer

Your 1 doesn't work because the accident rates of motor scooters and motorcycles would be constants or rates that remain about the same over time. Something that remains about the same would not explain or cause a new change such as a "drastic decline."

It's useful for CR to keep in mind that, in general, something that remains the same will not be the reason for a new change.

So, in this case, knowing how the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles would not be useful since, regardless of how they compare, that comparison would be something that has, presumably, remained about the same over time. So, that comparison would not be an alternative cause for the "drastic decline in sales over the last few years."

Engineer1 · Answer

Thanks Marty for the explanation.

GmatKnightTutor · Answer

﻿Motor-scooter dealers attribute a drastic decline in sales over the last few years to a new law requiring motor-scooter riders to wear helmets. Previously, helmets had been obligatory for motorcycle riders but not for motor-scooter riders-a difference that the dealers argue made scooters preferable for many customers. Safety advocates, however, dispute the dealers' explanation, pointing out that the law's introduction coincided with a large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance for both types of vehicle.

In evaluating the safety advocates' and the dealers' explanations, it would be most helpful to know which of the following?

A. Whether there were any motor-scooter riders who regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so
B. Whether the cost of mandatory insurance for other motor vehicles has increased at the same rate as the insurance cost for motor scooters and motorcycles
C. How the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles
D. How sales of imported motor scooters have changed compared with sales of domestically produced models
E. How sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed over the period that scooter sales have declined

The passage mentions how scooters are not as popular as they were before. That dealers complain this is because of a new law which requires scooter drivers to wear helmets. The safety advocates dispute this and say that the time the law was introduced, the mandatory insurance for both motorbikes and scooters went up significantly.

(E) is the answer. In a sense, if you are selling A and B that have a similar price, for example, and the sales of A are going DOWN, it would be hard to blame B for that if the sales of B weren't going UP at the same time. It would mean that something ELSE is causing this.

-contact: gmatknight site | gmatclub dm

Raman109 · Answer

Understanding the argument -
Motor-scooter dealers attribute a drastic decline in sales over the last few years to a new law requiring motor-scooter riders to wear helmets. - Fact
Previously, helmets had been obligatory for motorcycle riders but not for motor-scooter riders-a difference that the dealers argue made scooters preferable for many customers. - Fact. "Motor-scooter dealers" explanation.
Safety advocates, however, dispute the dealers' explanation, pointing out that the law's introduction coincided with a large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance for both types of vehicles. - Conclusion

Option Elimination - Evaluate the safety advocates' and the dealers' explanations -

A. Whether there were any motor-scooter riders who regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so - say yes, there was one. So what? The ones who were wearing them earlier may also wear them now, but the ones who don't are a concern, as per motor-scooter dealers. Out of scope. Moreover, it doesn't discuss the "Safety advocates" part. Notice we are evaluating "the safety advocates' AND (not OR) the dealers' explanations."

B. Whether the cost of mandatory insurance for other motor vehicles has increased at the same rate as the insurance cost for motor scooters and motorcycles - "other motor vehicles" are out of scope.

C. How the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles - The argument scope is to evaluate the explanations. Does anyone talk about the "accident rates" in either of the explanations? No. Out of scope.

D. How sales of imported motorscooters have changed compared with sales of domestically produced models - The argument "Motor-scooter dealers attribute a drastic decline in sales" doesn't distinguish between domestic and imported. Distortion.

E. How sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed over the period that scooter sales have declined - ok. Take two extremes
Yes, they have declined - strengthens the "Safety advocates" explanation and disputes the "Motor-scooter dealers" explanation.
No, they have not declined - strengthens the "Motor-scooter dealers" explanation and disputes the "Safety advocates" explanation.

siddhantvarma · Answer

To determine which piece of information would be most helpful in evaluating the safety advocates' and the dealers' explanations, we need to identify what would clarify whether the helmet law or the increase in insurance costs is more likely to be responsible for the decline in motor-scooter sales.

Argument Breakdown:

Dealers' Explanation:

The decline in sales is due to the new helmet law, which made scooters less preferable compared to when helmets were not required.  
 Safety Advocates' Explanation:

The decline in sales coincided with a large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance for both motor scooters and motorcycles, suggesting that higher insurance costs may be the cause.  
 Evaluating Answer Choices:

A. Whether there were any motor-scooter riders who regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so

This information is not directly relevant to determining the impact of the helmet law versus insurance costs on overall sales.  
 B. Whether the cost of mandatory insurance for other motor vehicles has increased at the same rate as the insurance cost for motor scooters and motorcycles

This is not directly relevant to determining the specific impact on motor-scooter sales since it doesn't compare scooters to motorcycles, which is necessary to evaluate the competing explanations.  
 C. How the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles

This does not address the sales decline directly and is more related to the relative safety of the vehicles rather than consumer purchasing behavior influenced by laws or costs.  
 D. How sales of imported motor scooters have changed compared with sales of domestically produced models

This would not help us understand whether the helmet law or the insurance cost increase caused the overall decline in sales.  
 E. How sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed over the period that scooter sales have declined

This is the most relevant information. If the sales of motorcycles with similar prices to motor scooters have also declined, it would support the safety advocates' argument that increased insurance costs are the primary cause of the sales decline. If motorcycle sales remained steady or increased while scooter sales declined, it would support the dealers' argument that the helmet law specifically discouraged scooter purchases.  
 Conclusion:

The information about how sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed would be most helpful in evaluating whether the decline in motor-scooter sales was due to the helmet law or the increase in insurance costs.

Therefore, the correct answer is:

E. How sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed over the period that scooter sales have declined.

mollyweasley · Answer

GMATNinja   MartyMurray   KarishmaB  could you please help me understand E. My confusion lies here: If sales of motorcycles go up, how does that help explain that it was the helmet law that caused it? Motorcycles had the mandatory helmet law in place already, so if users had an issue with helmets, why would they choose the motorcycle where they would anyway have to wear helmets?

KarishmaB · Answer

﻿Motor-scooter dealers:   Sales have declined drastically over the last few years due to a new law requiring motor-scooter riders to wear helmets.
Till now only motorcycle riders had to wear them,  not motor-scooter riders -a difference that the dealers argue made scooters preferable for many customers.

Safety advocates:  The law's introduction coincided with a large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance for both types of vehicle. That is why sales of motor-scooter has declined drastically.

Even before we read the options, what is it that will help us find whether the insurance cost is the reason for lower sales? Since insurance cost has increased for both, the decline in sales should have hit both - mtorcycles and motor scooters. If the decline in sales has hit only motor scooters then it is unlikely that insurance cost was the reason. Then the helmet compulsion could have led to reduced sales.

A. Whether there were any motor-scooter riders who regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so

Irrelevant. Even if some motor-scooter riders regularly wore helmets before the law required them to do so, many others who did not want to wear it might nor have wanted to buy a motor scooter.

B. Whether the cost of mandatory insurance for other motor vehicles has increased at the same rate as the insurance cost for motor scooters and motorcycles

Other motor vehicles are irrelevant.

C. How the accident rate for motor scooters compares to the accident rate for motorcycles

Irrelevant. It doesn't help us evaluate whether the decrease in sales has happened because of helmet law or increased cost of insurance.

D. How sales of imported motor scooters have changed compared with sales of domestically produced models

Irrelevant.

E. How sales of motorcycles that are close in purchase price to motor scooters have changed over the period that scooter sales have declined

Makes sense. We need to know how sales of comparable motorcycles has changed (increased/decreased/stayed the same). The high insurance is applicable on both so if that is the reason, it should affect both in the same way.

Hence if high insurance is the reason the sales of comparable motorcycles should have reduced significantly too. 
But if the helmet law is the issue then sales of comparable motorcycles should have stayed the same or could have even increased. After all, it was always required to wear helmet for motorcycles so its sales must not be affected or its sales could even increase. If people were buying motor scooter because helmet was not required for them, then after it became mandatory, people could have switched to buy a similar motorcycle only, not a motor scooter. Hence knowing the answer to this question will be helpful.

Answer (E)

Prateek_Sood · Answer

I think this is a  high-quality  question.

Tanabhumi · Answer

Do you have more questions like this with two viewpoints for evaluation? This is my first time encountering this type, and I’d like to practice with a few more examples.

quiaitaque · Answer

MartyMurray

Correct me if I'm wrong. In this case we have to evaluvate the conclusion that its the reduction in sales of Motor Scooters was as a result of the law intorduction that  casued the large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance over the effects of the decline in preferability of the motor scooters as a result of the law introduction.

So the Key in   Evaluvate Questiosn is to; 
 1. Identify the Conclusion of the Argument 
 2. Select the Statement that best Evaluvates the Argument

MartyMurray · Answer

That's mostly accurate, except in that, in this case, there are actually two conclusions the support for which can be evaluated:

- The decline in sales can be attributed to  a new law requiring motor-scooter riders to wear helmets.

- The decline in sales can be attributed to a large increase in the cost of mandatory insurance for both types of vehicle.

So, in selecting an answer, we can consider whether information mentioned by each of the choices would weaken or strengthen the case for either of the two conclusions. It may weaken or strengthen the case for one of them, and thus indirectly strengthen the case for the other, or somehow both directly weaken the case for one and directly strengthen the case for the other.

Motor-scooter dealers attribute a drastic decline in sales over the

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 Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Motor-scooter dealers attribute a drastic decline in sales over the

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