Don’t lose your progress!

We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.

Up to 90+ points GMAT score improvement guarantee

The best guarantee you’ll find

Our Premium and Ultimate plans guarantee up to 90+ points score increase or your money back.

Master each section of the test

Comprehensive GMAT prep

We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.

Schedule-free studying

Learn on the go

Study whenever and wherever you want with our iOS and Android mobile apps.

The most effective way to study

Personalized GMAT prep, just for you!

Adaptive learning technology focuses on your academic weaknesses.

Critical Reasoning: Conclusion Strengthening Questions

With competitive cycling increasing in popularity, the appearance of cyclists on roads used by motor vehicles has become more commonplace. The Road Safety Association announced that in the last year, 4 deaths and 67 injuries were caused by collisions between cyclists and motor vehicles. None of these cases involved driving under the influence of inebriating substances, the most frequent cause of accidents. It is clear that roads should be organized in a way that will allow both motor vehicles and cyclists to use them simultaneously and safely.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the author's conclusion?

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

By bringing forward a negative aspect of organizing roads (something that the conclusion recommends) this answer choice weakens the conclusion. The conclusion supports the organization of roads and, therefore, stating that it is an extremely costly process does not strengthen this conclusion, which is what you are aiming to do.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

This answer choice provides information that is irrelevant to the task at hand: strengthening the conclusion. The argument states that the collisions with cyclists were not caused by inebriated drivers and so this statement does not support or weaken the conclusion.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

This answer choice does not weaken or strengthen the conclusion. Because the conclusion states a recommendation to renew roads in a way that will cater for cyclists and vehicles, suggesting the creation of parks does not affect the argument in any way.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

If anything, this answer choice weakens the conclusion by stating that helmets can prevent injury, implying that re-organizing roads is perhaps unnecessary.

Superb!

[[snippet]]

This answer choice strengthens the conclusion by providing an actual example of how the theory presented in the conclusion has worked in helping prevent accidents.

The building and renovating of roads is an extremely costly process involving the input of a wide range of professionals.
Inebriating substances not only result in poorer control of a vehicle but also in a delayed reaction time to events that may occur.
Cycling parks should be created to allow enthusiasts to practice their sport safely.
Wearing protective gear, such as a helmet, reduces the risk of serious injury and in some countries is provided by governments at no expense.
A system using electronic lighting and protective barriers that was implemented in Norway, reduced incidents of collisions between vehicles and cyclists by 28%.