求教逻辑 - prep exam 4

emmalululu123

排除法是可以选出来，但是选项A的逻辑是啥？谢谢


Motorcycle-safety courses, offered by a number of organizations, teach motorcyclists important techniques for handling their vehicles and for safely sharing the road with other road users. If more motorcyclists took these courses, there would be fewer serious motorcycle accidents. Data show that 92 percent of the motorcyclists who are involved in a serious motorcycle accident have never taken a motorcycle-safety course.

In assessing whether the data cited provide support for the position taken about more motorcyclists’ taking the courses, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?

• 
  Whether significantly more than eight percent of motorcyclists have taken a motorcycle-safety course
  
• 
  Whether it is riskier for a motorcyclist to ride with a passenger behind the rider than to ride alone
  
• 
  Whether the different organizations that offer motorcycle-safety courses differ in the content of the courses that they offer
  
• 
  Whether more than 92 percent of serious motorcycle accidents involve collisions between a motorcycle and another vehicle in motion
  
• 
  Whether variations in the size and potential speed of a motorcycle influence the risk of a serious accident’s occurring
  
  

ShayneYang

个人觉得这个题的思路是抽样和整体的关系。如果上过课的人超过的8%，而最后出事的里面上过课占8%，说明这个课真的有作用；反之，如果上过课的人没有8%，反而最后出事的里面上过课的还占8%，就说明这个课没有作用甚至起反作用

粒粒米

该题的逻辑链是：92%（绝大部分）摩托车事故里的人没有上过培训，所以上培训有助于避开事故。
其实是构筑了上课和减少交通事故的因果链，但是A选项如果是否定答案的话，说明，所有人都没怎么上过培训，没发生事故的人里面也有绝大部分人没上过培训。所以否定了这层因果关系~
或者，也可以从样本和总体的逻辑pattern来看

lurenyi3

题干里说严重事故的司机里92%没学过安全课程，说明8%学过；结论想支持安全课程，即学了就能避免事故。
A选项的8%是临界点，如果远高于8%的人（比如取极值100%）学过，但是还有92%出事故，说明学了没用，反驳了结论；如果小于等于8%的人学了，这部分人可以被包括在题目里那8%之内，说明学了有用，可以支持结论！

Alulu30

我自己也做错了，大概推了一下:

Motorcycle-safety courses, offered by a number of organizations, teach motorcyclists important techniques for handling their vehicles and for safely sharing the road with other road users. If more motorcyclists took these courses, there would be fewer serious motorcycle accidents. Data show that 92 percent of the motorcyclists who are involved in a serious motorcycle accident have never taken a motorcycle-safety course.

先解释了一下motorcycle-safety courses是什么，结论是如果更多骑摩托车的人参加了这个课程，那么严重事故就会减少。依据是数据显示92%骑摩托车出严重事故的人都没有参加这个课程。

（思考方向：那剩下8%没出事故的参加课程了吗？）

In assessing whether the data cited provide support for the position taken about more motorcyclists’ taking the courses, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?

A. Whether significantly more than eight percent of motorcyclists have taken a motorcycle-safety course 是否超过8%的人参加了这个课程，如果8%的人没上过课，那就是大家都没有上过，无法得出结论句的因果关系

B. Whether it is riskier for a motorcyclist to ride with a passenger behind the rider than to ride alone 单独骑车vs载人，无关

C. Whether the different organizations that offer motorcycle-safety courses differ in the content of the courses that they offer 不同组织提供的不同课程，无关

D. Whether more than 92 percent of serious motorcycle accidents involve collisions between a motorcycle and another vehicle in motion 是否超过92%严重事故都是因为摩托车和其他vehicle的撞击，我自己误选了这个，本以为是呼应了第一句里"teach motorcyclists important techniques for handling their vehicles and for safely sharing the road with other road users"，但根据结论句，应该关注点是参不参加课程，而不是课程里面更细的内容，自己想复杂了。

E. Whether variations in the size and potential speed of a motorcycle influence the risk of a serious accident’s occurring 尺寸和速度，无关

ps：最近开始做逻辑链训练，觉得如果一开始有思路预判比较好选，不然容易看几个选项就被带偏了。。。

Blair__Lu

假设：一共有1000个motorcyclists  有100个人遭受严重事故
题干：92%遭受重大事故的人未上安全课  意味着 8% 根据假设就是8个人上课了

A选项
假设一 上课的人大于总数的8% 我们取个最小值9%
意味着1000人中90个人上课 910人没上课
那么上过课人遭受重大事故的概率为8/90小于10%
未上过课的人遭受重大事故的概率为92/910大于10%
数据支持结论-即上课有用

假设二 同理 可以取最大值7%
结论-上课的遭受事故可能性大于10% 未上课小于10%
数据反对结论-上课没用

其实8%是一个中间点 也就是上课的人和未上课的人经历重大事故的可能性是相同的。

再战请勿拦

Blair__Lu 发表于 2020-12-18 02:14
假设：一共有1000个motorcyclists  有100个人遭受严重事故
题干：92%遭受重大事故的人未上安全课  意味着 8 ...

太厉害了，感谢