Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
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
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
22 Jul 2024, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
62% (01:35) correct
38%
(01:52)
wrong
based on 268
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
In cars, airbags provide good protection for the chest and head, but little or no protection for legs. A study of injuries resulting from car accidents showed that a large proportion were caused by blows to the legs. Therefore, if airbags protected this area, the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced, especially since____________________.
A. among the drivers included in the study's sample of injuries, only a very small proportion had been wearing an airbag at the time of accident.
B. even those drivers who drive cars with airbags have poor understanding of the degree and kind of protection that airbags afford.
C. an airbag that included protection for the legs would have to be somewhat larger and more expensive than current airbags.
D. although the bones in the legs are large, severe impacts in that area are very likely to cause serious injury, such as compound fracture.
E. drivers generally remain in their seat when they crash, which reduces the likelihood of severe impacts to the legs.
In cars, airbags provide good protection for the chest and head, but little or no protection for legs. A study of injuries resulting from car accidents showed that a large proportion were caused by blows to the legs. Therefore, if airbags protected this area, the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced, especially since____________________.
A. among the drivers included in the study's sample of injuries, only a very small proportion had been wearing an airbag at the time of accident.
B. even those drivers who drive cars with airbags have poor understanding of the degree and kind of protection that airbags afford.
C. an airbag that included protection for the legs would have to be somewhat larger and more expensive than current airbags.
D. although the bones in the legs are large, severe impacts in that area are very likely to cause serious injury, such as compound fracture.
E. drivers generally remain in their seat when they crash, which reduces the likelihood of severe impacts to the legs.
22 Jul 2024, 08:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
To solve this question, let us deploy IMS's four-step technique.
STEP #1 -> IDENTIFY THE QUESTION TYPE
Let us read the question prompt to identify the question type.
STEP #2 -> X-RAY THE ARGUMENT
Let us now x-ray the argument and understand it.
FACT #2: A study of injuries resulting from car accidents showed that a large proportion were caused by blows to the legs.
CONCLUSION: If airbags protected this area, the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced.
STEP #3 -> FRAME A SHADOW ANSWER
To frame a shadow answer, we need to know what the right answer should do. Here, the author's conclusion, a hypothetical consideration, says the risk of SERIOUS injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced if airbags protected legs. None of the two facts though discuss the severity of injuries. Furthermore, the blank being preceded with 'especially since' tells us the correct answer must state why the risk of SERIOUS injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced if airbags protected legs. In other words, we are looking for an answer option that best supports the hypothetical consideration of the author.
SHADOW ANSWER: An option that explains why the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced if airbags protected legs.
STEP #4 -> ELIMINATE INCORRECT ANSWERS
Let us eliminate answer options that do not match the shadow answer.
A. among the drivers included in the study's sample of injuries, only a very small proportion had been wearing an airbag at the time of accident. - NOT A MATCH - Let us ask ourselves if it would make sense to say, 'Therefore, if airbags protected legs, the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced, especially since among the drivers included in the study's sample of injuries, only a very small proportion had been wearing an airbag at the time of accident.' Of course not! As per fact #1, airbags do little or no to protect legs; thus, any info about the proportion of drivers in the study's sample who were wearing an airbag at the time of the accident is irrelevant, implying we will not have an explanation for why the risk of SERIOUS injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced IF AIRBAGS PROTECTED LEGS. - ELIMINATE
B. even those drivers who drive cars with airbags have poor understanding of the degree and kind of protection that airbags afford. - NOT A MATCH - Any info regarding the understanding of drivers who drive cars with airbags is beyond the scope of the argument and will not explain or support the author's hypothetical consideration. - ELIMINATE
C. an airbag that included protection for the legs would have to be somewhat larger and more expensive than current airbags. - NOT A MATCH - The argument does not concern itself with the size or expensiveness of airbags. Importantly, airbags (regardless of their size or expensiveness) provide little or no protection for legs as per the author, so if this became a part of the argument, the author would be contradicting himself. - ELIMINATE
D. although the bones in the legs are large, severe impacts in that area are very likely to cause serious injury, such as compound fracture. - MATCHES THE SHADOW ANSWER - Bingo! This tells us exactly why the risk of SERIOUS injury in car accidents would greatly reduce IF AIRBAGS PROTECTED LEGS. Let us perform the final check: In cars, airbags provide good protection for the chest and head, but little or no protection for legs. A study of injuries resulting from car accidents showed that a large proportion were caused by blows to the legs. Therefore, if airbags protected this area, the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced, especially since although the bones in the legs are large, severe impacts in that area are very likely to cause serious injury, such as compound fracture. Reads perfectly well! We have no reason to eliminate this option. - KEEP
E. drivers generally remain in their seat when they crash, which reduces the likelihood of severe impacts to the legs. - NOT A MATCH - We are looking for an option that supports the author's conclusion; this option, however, indicates that airbags for legs might not really serve a great purpose. - ELIMINATE
Hence, (D) has to be the correct answer.
STEP #1 -> IDENTIFY THE QUESTION TYPE
Let us read the question prompt to identify the question type.
Quote:
The stem indicates a complete the passage question.
STEP #2 -> X-RAY THE ARGUMENT
Let us now x-ray the argument and understand it.
Quote:
FACT #1: In cars, airbags provide good protection for the chest and head, but little or no protection for legs.
FACT #2: A study of injuries resulting from car accidents showed that a large proportion were caused by blows to the legs.
CONCLUSION: If airbags protected this area, the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced.
STEP #3 -> FRAME A SHADOW ANSWER
To frame a shadow answer, we need to know what the right answer should do. Here, the author's conclusion, a hypothetical consideration, says the risk of SERIOUS injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced if airbags protected legs. None of the two facts though discuss the severity of injuries. Furthermore, the blank being preceded with 'especially since' tells us the correct answer must state why the risk of SERIOUS injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced if airbags protected legs. In other words, we are looking for an answer option that best supports the hypothetical consideration of the author.
SHADOW ANSWER: An option that explains why the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced if airbags protected legs.
STEP #4 -> ELIMINATE INCORRECT ANSWERS
Let us eliminate answer options that do not match the shadow answer.
A. among the drivers included in the study's sample of injuries, only a very small proportion had been wearing an airbag at the time of accident. - NOT A MATCH - Let us ask ourselves if it would make sense to say, 'Therefore, if airbags protected legs, the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced, especially since among the drivers included in the study's sample of injuries, only a very small proportion had been wearing an airbag at the time of accident.' Of course not! As per fact #1, airbags do little or no to protect legs; thus, any info about the proportion of drivers in the study's sample who were wearing an airbag at the time of the accident is irrelevant, implying we will not have an explanation for why the risk of SERIOUS injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced IF AIRBAGS PROTECTED LEGS. - ELIMINATE
B. even those drivers who drive cars with airbags have poor understanding of the degree and kind of protection that airbags afford. - NOT A MATCH - Any info regarding the understanding of drivers who drive cars with airbags is beyond the scope of the argument and will not explain or support the author's hypothetical consideration. - ELIMINATE
C. an airbag that included protection for the legs would have to be somewhat larger and more expensive than current airbags. - NOT A MATCH - The argument does not concern itself with the size or expensiveness of airbags. Importantly, airbags (regardless of their size or expensiveness) provide little or no protection for legs as per the author, so if this became a part of the argument, the author would be contradicting himself. - ELIMINATE
D. although the bones in the legs are large, severe impacts in that area are very likely to cause serious injury, such as compound fracture. - MATCHES THE SHADOW ANSWER - Bingo! This tells us exactly why the risk of SERIOUS injury in car accidents would greatly reduce IF AIRBAGS PROTECTED LEGS. Let us perform the final check: In cars, airbags provide good protection for the chest and head, but little or no protection for legs. A study of injuries resulting from car accidents showed that a large proportion were caused by blows to the legs. Therefore, if airbags protected this area, the risk of serious injury in car accidents would be greatly reduced, especially since although the bones in the legs are large, severe impacts in that area are very likely to cause serious injury, such as compound fracture. Reads perfectly well! We have no reason to eliminate this option. - KEEP
E. drivers generally remain in their seat when they crash, which reduces the likelihood of severe impacts to the legs. - NOT A MATCH - We are looking for an option that supports the author's conclusion; this option, however, indicates that airbags for legs might not really serve a great purpose. - ELIMINATE
Hence, (D) has to be the correct answer.
03 Aug 2024, 12:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:
Reading the question: we have a novel task in this question: we will complete the passage! The answer choices, as you can see, are not of a format such that they can be negated or analyzed by cases. Questions that ask for you for a logical continuation tend to have this problem, so, on logical continuation questions, the second step of the Critical Reasoning Strategy will usually not be possible (e.g., the answer choices cannot be negated), and you'll have to answer the question using only a filter.
Creating a filter: We are putting something in the blank that will complete the idea that bigger airbags that go down and cover the legs will reduce serious injuries. There is already evidence on the table; what's missing? We gravitate to the charged word "serious." The study cited in the prior sentence says "a large proportion" of accidents, but says nothing about their seriousness. So, what's missing and could go in the blank would be first of all, that the air bags will work in the leg area, and secondly, something about the seriousness of the accidents. That's our filter.
Applying the filter: Which answer choices fit either of these categories? Choices (A) through (C) do not. Choice (D) does. Choice (E) might. We take a closer look at (E). (E) discusses the likelihood of severe accidents in general, but it doesn't help us figure out whether specifically the accidents that have been happening and that an air bag will stop are severe. Back to (D). Choice (D) basically tells us, "Leg injuries are serious." This fills in one of the key missing pieces of the argument.
The correct answer is (D).
