Numerous city planning professionals are convinced that downtown bicycle infrastructure development was the direct driver behind the recent dramatic r...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
Numerous city planning professionals are convinced that downtown bicycle infrastructure development was the direct driver behind the recent dramatic rise in bike commuting. The chronological sequence seems to validate this perspective, given that cycling usage data demonstrates a significant uptick after major bicycle infrastructure initiatives were finished in 2018. Nevertheless, this emphasis on physical infrastructure as the primary explanation might not tell the complete story. Municipal transit records spanning 2015 through 2022 demonstrate that bicycle commuting numbers had started their consistent upward trajectory in 2016, a full two years prior to when bike lane development began.
According to the passage, what inference can be drawn regarding the recent increase in bicycle commuting activity?
The bicycle infrastructure development probably had a smaller impact on encouraging cycling than city planners had expected.
Elements beyond bicycle infrastructure development might bear greater responsibility for the rise in cycling participation.
Bike commuting numbers likely maintained their upward trend for a duration exceeding what the infrastructure initiatives were designed to sustain.
With growing bicycle usage, municipal planners probably redirected their attention away from alternative transit enhancements toward cycling infrastructure.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Create Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "Numerous city planning professionals are convinced that downtown bicycle infrastructure development was the direct driver behind the recent dramatic rise in bike commuting." |
|
| "The chronological sequence seems to validate this perspective, given that cycling usage data demonstrates a significant uptick after major bicycle infrastructure initiatives were finished in 2018." |
|
| "Nevertheless, this emphasis on physical infrastructure as the primary explanation might not tell the complete story." |
|
| "Municipal transit records spanning 2015 through 2022 demonstrate that bicycle commuting numbers had started their consistent upward trajectory in 2016, a full two years prior to when bike lane development began." |
|
Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: While city planners believe bicycle infrastructure development directly caused the rise in bike commuting, transit records reveal that bike commuting was already increasing before the infrastructure was built, suggesting other factors may be more significant.
Argument Flow: The passage presents the city planners' confident belief that infrastructure development caused increased bike commuting, initially supported by timing evidence. However, it then reveals more comprehensive data showing bike commuting was rising two years before infrastructure development began, casting doubt on infrastructure as the primary cause.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
This is a fill-in-the-blank question asking us to choose the best logical connector. The answer must create the right relationship between what comes before and after the blank.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The key insight from our passage analysis is that bike commuting was rising before infrastructure development began
- This timing mismatch suggests the planners' explanation is incomplete
- The right answer should recognize that:
- Infrastructure might not be the primary driver they thought it was
- Other factors were likely already causing the increase
- The timing evidence contradicts the infrastructure-as-cause theory
- So the right answer should acknowledge that factors other than infrastructure development are likely more responsible for the bike commuting increase
The bicycle infrastructure development probably had a smaller impact on encouraging cycling than city planners had expected.
✗ Incorrect
- This focuses on the infrastructure having "smaller impact than expected"
- While the passage suggests infrastructure wasn't the main driver, it doesn't compare the actual impact to planners' expectations about impact size
- The passage is about timing and causation, not about measuring impact against expectations
Elements beyond bicycle infrastructure development might bear greater responsibility for the rise in cycling participation.
✓ Correct
- This directly matches our passage analysis - other elements "might bear greater responsibility"
- The 2016 start date (before infrastructure) strongly suggests other factors were driving the increase
- Uses appropriately cautious language that matches the passage's suggestion that infrastructure "might not tell the complete story"
Bike commuting numbers likely maintained their upward trend for a duration exceeding what the infrastructure initiatives were designed to sustain.
✗ Incorrect
- This discusses duration of the trend versus what infrastructure was "designed to sustain"
- The passage never mentions what the infrastructure initiatives were designed to accomplish or sustain
- This misses the key timing issue that commuting was rising before infrastructure existed
With growing bicycle usage, municipal planners probably redirected their attention away from alternative transit enhancements toward cycling infrastructure.
✗ Incorrect
- This suggests planners redirected attention from other transit to cycling infrastructure
- The passage doesn't discuss what planners did with their attention or other transit projects
- This introduces information not present in the passage