According to the National Science Foundation, in 2003 there

Question

According to the National Science Foundation, in 2003 there were 198,113 female science and engineering graduate students, almost 42% of the graduate students in those fields,  twice as much as 1981 .
 1.twice as much as 1981
 2.twice as many as 1981
 3.double the figure for 1981
 4.double what it was in 1981
 5.a number double that of 1981’s

mrik · Answer

IMO C. for 1981 correctly compares in my opinion

mailnavin1 · Answer

2,

345 awkward and 1 out for the count factor

gmatjon · Answer

Actually, 2 is ungrammatical, because it should say "twice as many as in 1982". The second option is comparing number of females to a year 1981, which is incorrect. Option 3 is the perfect answer.

gmatjon · Answer

Option 2 is clearly wrong, because it is missing "in"

serhio · Answer

It is C. 
However the phrase "double the figure for" - is very strange for me. I just cann`t get use to it - so I had just to remember it and that`s it.

Prax · Answer

The OA is C. Here is the explanation:

In the original sentence, “much” incorrectly references the quantity of female graduate students. Students are countable, so “many” is the correct term. Additionally, “as 1981” incorrectly completes the comparison, illogically comparing the number of people (the “198,113 female science and engineering graduate students”) to a year (“1981”).

(A) This choice is incorrect as it repeats the original sentence.

(B) “As 1981” incorrectly completes the comparison, illogically comparing the number of people (the “198,113 female science and engineering graduate students”) to a year (“1981”).

(C) CORRECT. “Double the figure” places the emphasis on the number of female graduate students, and correctly completes the comparison between the number of people in one year (198,133 in 2003) and the number of people in another year (the figure for 1981).

(D) “What it was” is wordy, awkward, and unclear. The singular pronoun "it" has no clear antecedent.

(E) “Double that of 1981’s” is wordy, awkward, and unclear. The singular pronoun "that" has no clear antecedent. The possessive "1981's" is not followed by a noun to possess.

ykaiim · Answer

Prax,

Good job. You are posting the OA and OE. Kudos.

I think in C,   for   should be replaced by   in  , to parallel - ...in 2003....in 1981:
double the figure   in   1993.

Experts please comment.

ykaiim · Answer

I think Manhattan explaination has same issue:

(C) CORRECT. “Double the figure” places the emphasis on the number of female graduate students, and correctly completes the comparison between the number of people   in one year   (198,133 in 2003) and the number of people     in   another year   (the figure for 1981).

Can you please check and confirm?

dwivedys · Answer

I believe it's a matter of Idiomatic usage: it should be FIGURE FOR and not FIGURE IN just as it is correct to say "the number of people in 1981" and NOT "the number of people FOR 1981"

x times the figure for (double the figure for or twice the figure for and so on) is idiomatic usage...

abhicoolmax · Answer

So does this mean (C) is correct, ONLY because others are in-correct?

Should the ideal choice be one of the following? If not, what's wrong in the following?
1. double those were in 1981 (what if "were" is removed?)
2. double the number in 1981
3. twice as many as in 1981

Also, is "double the figure for" is commonly used to replace "double the number in"? This is very confusing.

According to the National Science Foundation, in 2003 there

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