change, while people adjust to the new limit, than over the longer term when drivers
have become accustomed to the change.
Secondly, the editorial fails to acknowledge possible differences in the types of
accidents occurring before and after the change. It is possible that the accidents during
the week before the change all involved fatalities, while those during the week after the
change were minor fender-benders. If so, even though 3 percent more accidents
occurred after the change, the authors argument that changing the speed limit increases
danger for drivers would be seriously weakened.
Thirdly, the editorial fails to take into account possible differences between East
and West Cambria that are relevant to how drivers react to speed-limit changes. Factors
such as the condition of roads, average age and typical driving habits of residents, and
weather patterns, would probably affect how well or how quickly drivers adapt to
speed-limit changes. Thus, changing speed limits in East Cambria might be more
dangerous than changing them in West Cambria.
In conclusion, the statistical evidence cited to support the argument is
insignificant and probably unrepresentative. To better evaluate the argument, we need to
【GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文二三】相关文章:
最新
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02