A recent study of 10,000

Answer choices

1. A

   Irrelevant Distinction Too Weak10% picked this

   Most of the accidents analyzed in the study occurred in areas with very

   The best case we could make for this answer choice is that it sounds like the study data might be skewed, by dealing with a potentially unrepresentative slice of driving situations: areas with very high speed limits. But that's a very weak attack. If this answer isn't cheapening the data, then it's doing nothing to address the difference between driving a large / small car.

   10%
2. B

   Too Weak / Irrelevant3% picked this

   Most people who own small cars also drive large cars

   "On occasion" is a pretty giveaway that this is too weak to have any significant impact. Also, it doesn't really matter if large car drivers sometimes drive small cars or vice versa. The conclusion isn't about a type of driver. It's about which type of car is more/less likely to end up being in an injured driver situation.

   3%
3. C

   Out of Scope: "medium-sized cars"10% picked this

   Half of the study participants drove medium­ sized cars at the time

   We might think we're wriggling our way out of some False Choice between large and small cars, but the author never acted like large and small are the only two choices. The author has noticed a significant statistical difference between large and small and is trying to make a comparative conclusion based on that difference. The only way information about very-small / medium / very-large cars would affect this conversation is if we also had their injury rate, so that we could judge whether there seemed to be a smooth continuum of "the larger the car, the lower the injury rate".

   10%
4. D

   Correct70% picked this

   A large automobile is far more likely to be involved in an accident than is

   Why this is right

   We like strong language on Strengthen/Weaken/Paradox, so far more likely is instantly attractive. This answer affects how we judge the conclusion. Maybe the study revealed that 10% of large car drivers were injured in their accidents whereas 20% of small car drivers were injured in their accidents. If large cars are far more likely to be in an accident than small cars, then the probability of getting injured in an accident might still be higher for large car drivers. If you like probability math, keep reading: Say that 10% of large car drivers are injured in accidents while 20% of small car drivers are. But also add the idea that 60% of large car drivers will get into an accident, whereas only 25% of small car drivers will. Probability of being injured in large car: 60% * 10% = 6/10 * 1/10 = 6/100 = 6% Probability of being injured in small car: 25% * 20% = 1/4 * 1/5 = 1/20 = 5/100 = 5%

   Skill tested: Weaken · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   70%
5. E

   Relative VS. Absolute6% picked this

   Only a small percentage of those people involved in an automobile accident are injured

   It doesn't matter that the overall likelihood of people getting injured is small, an absolute term. This argument is about whether a likelihood is smaller, a relative term.

   6%