PrepTest 114, Section 1, Question 17
In order to determine automobile insurance premiums for(71 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(6 more words not shown)
- APeople who drive(18 more words not shown)
- BPeople who drive(16 more words not shown)
- CPeople who drive(15 more words not shown)
- DPeople who drive(20 more words not shown)
- EPeople who drive(15 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
More trips mean more opportunities for something to go wrong. I can see the idea behind charging more for more frequent driving. Someone on the road every day has many more occasions to encounter a mishap than someone who drives only once in a long while.
My first question is practical: how would the insurer measure the frequency? Would drivers report it themselves? Would the company use a device in the car? We haven't been told. That is a possible implementation concern, not proof that measurement is impossible.
What we’re looking for
The question asks us to weaken the argument for increasing premiums with driving frequency. I'd initially look for a problem with putting that recommendation into practice. But a choice could also undermine the inference from more occasions on the road to how much a driver should pay. Let's see which concern the answers support.
Working the answers
- A
This compares where infrequent drivers' accidents occur: small roads rather than highways. It doesn't compare their overall accident risk with frequent drivers' risk. Nor does it tell us those small-road accidents are more or less severe. We can't turn a location difference into the missing risk comparison.
- BCorrect
This takes a different route from my measurement concern. Infrequent drivers are less likely to follow safe-driving rules. That gives them a possible disadvantage whenever they do drive, even though they drive on fewer occasions.
Think of the two separate questions: how often does the person drive, and how safely does the person drive on those occasions? An infrequent driver might have fewer opportunities for a crash but create more danger on each one. B shows why the number of trips alone doesn't settle the premium comparison.
We haven't proved that infrequent drivers have the higher total risk or must pay more. B need only weaken the simple case for charging more as driving becomes more frequent. It introduces a relevant difference working against that recommendation.
- C
Infrequent drivers being less likely to violate speed limits supplies a safety advantage for that group. That fits with charging the more frequent group more; it doesn't give us the opposing consideration we need. We shouldn't confuse this safer behavior with B's failure to follow safe-driving rules.
- D
More long-distance trips don't supply a reason to charge frequent drivers less. If anything, additional time on the road could reinforce the concern about exposure to mishaps. D doesn't identify a disadvantage for the infrequent drivers or otherwise undermine the proposed direction of the premiums.
- E
Greater distraction among frequent drivers supplies another potential risk for that group. That is consistent with higher premiums for frequent drivers. It doesn't weaken the recommendation.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.