In a study by Mika R. Moran, Daniel A. Rodriguez, and colleagues, residents of Quito, Ecuador, and Lima, Peru, were...

GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions

Source: Official

Information and Ideas

Central Ideas and Details

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

In a study by Mika R. Moran, Daniel A. Rodriguez, and colleagues, residents of Quito, Ecuador, and Lima, Peru, were surveyed about parks in their cities. Of the 618 respondents from Quito, \(82.9\%\) indicated that they use the city's parks, and of the 663 respondents from Lima, \(72.7\%\) indicated using city parks. Given that the percentage of Quito respondents who reported living within a 10-minute walk of a park was much lower than that reported by Lima respondents, greater proximity alone can't explain the difference in park use.

The text makes which point about the difference between the proportions of Quito residents and Lima residents using parks?

It was much larger than the researchers conducting the study expected.

It is caused by something other than the parks' proximity to city residents.

It could be due to inaccuracies in the survey results.

It was calculated using sources that predate the survey.

Solution

Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage

Part A: Create Passage Analysis Table

Text from Passage	Analysis
"In a study by Mika R. Moran, Daniel A. Rodriguez, and colleagues, residents of Quito, Ecuador, and Lima, Peru, were surveyed about parks in their cities."	What it says: Study - Moran et al. surveyed Quito & Lima residents re: parks What it does: Introduces the research context and setup What it is: Background/context
"Of the \(618\) respondents from Quito, \(82.9\%\) indicated that they use the city's parks,"	What it says: Quito: 618 people, 82.9% use parks What it does: Provides the first key data point from the study What it is: Evidence/data
"and of the \(663\) respondents from Lima, \(72.7\%\) indicated using city parks."	What it says: Lima: 663 people, 72.7% use parks What it does: Provides the comparison data point What it is: Evidence/data Visualization: \(\mathrm{Quito\ (82.9\%)} \gt \mathrm{Lima\ (72.7\%)}\)
"Given that the percentage of Quito respondents who reported living within a 10-minute walk of a park was much lower than that reported by Lima respondents,"	What it says: Quito residents: much fewer live \(\lt 10\mathrm{min}\) from parks vs Lima What it does: Introduces surprising contrasting information about proximity What it is: Qualifying context
"greater proximity alone can't explain the difference in park use."	What it says: Proximity not sole cause of usage difference What it does: States the main conclusion drawn from the data What it is: Claim/conclusion

Part B: Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements

Main Point: A study found that proximity to parks alone cannot explain why Quito residents use parks at higher rates than Lima residents despite living farther from them.

Argument Flow: The passage presents park usage data showing Quito has higher usage than Lima, then reveals the counterintuitive fact that Quito residents actually live farther from parks on average. This leads to the conclusion that factors beyond simple proximity must be driving the usage difference.

Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely

What's being asked? What specific point the text makes about the difference in park usage proportions between the two cities

What type of answer do we need? A claim or conclusion that the text explicitly makes about this difference

Any limiting keywords? "the difference between the proportions" focuses us specifically on the usage rate comparison (\(82.9\%\) vs \(72.7\%\))

Step 3: Prethink the Answer

The text compares two usage rates: Quito at \(82.9\%\) and Lima at \(72.7\%\)
It then reveals that despite Quito's higher usage, its residents actually live farther from parks than Lima residents
The text concludes that "greater proximity alone can't explain the difference in park use"
This means the text is making a point about causation—that the usage difference must be caused by something other than proximity
So the right answer should indicate that the difference in usage rates is caused by factors other than how close people live to parks

Answer Choices Explained

It was much larger than the researchers conducting the study expected.

✗ Incorrect

Claims the difference was larger than researchers expected
The passage never mentions the researchers' expectations or surprise about the size of the difference

It is caused by something other than the parks' proximity to city residents.

✓ Correct

States the difference is caused by something other than proximity
Directly matches the passage's conclusion that "greater proximity alone can't explain the difference"

It could be due to inaccuracies in the survey results.

✗ Incorrect

Suggests the difference might be due to survey inaccuracies
The passage treats the survey results as reliable data—there's no mention of potential inaccuracies

It was calculated using sources that predate the survey.

✗ Incorrect

Claims the difference was calculated using outdated sources
The passage describes a single study with contemporary data collection

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...