PTF97.S1.Q14 - In jurisdictions where the use of headlights is optional

Andres.ULSATAndres.ULSAT Live Member
edited January 7 in Logical Reasoning 48 karma

There is no explanation for this question on 7sage, so I'll just post a discussion that includes my reasoning on how I got this wrong in timed conditions and later right in BR. If anyone finds it useful, great!

RRE question.

In jurisdictions where the use of headlights is optional when visibility is good, drivers who use headlights at all times are less likely to be involved in a collision than those drivers who use headlights only when visibility is poor.

Record shows that making use of headlights mandatory does nothing to reduce the overall number of collisions.

<><><><><><><><><><><><>

Why is it that drivers who use headlights at all times are less likely to be involved in a collision than those that only use it when visibility is poor? If in any case, the record shows that making it mandatory does not reduce the number of collisions.

Sometimes repeating the stimulus in a question form that directly addresses what the gap is between the 2 statements is what helps reach the link the gap of what is missing. It is also important to do this in a confusing stimulus because you do not want to lose sight of what you are trying to reconcile.

It is also good to prephrase (try to picture the flaw in a question before moving into the ACs). In this case, because maybe what causes the collision is not necessarily the headlights and perhaps there is another factor that plays a role, and the headlights are just correlated with this.

<><><><><><><><>

AC C: I picked it but I switched to E on timed conditions (wrong decision). C sounds kind of irrelevant but in reality, it directly addresses the question stated above. Why is it that there is a difference between the drivers who use headlights at all times and those who do not? Because the former are more careful, which might explain why they get into less collisions.

AC E: This sounds good at first, but it fails to reconcile the statements. It just gives a reason to maybe why the jurisdiction implemented the law. It does not explain why those drivers that use headlights at all are less likely to be involved in a collision than those who use it when is poor.

Sign In or Register to comment.