Critical Reasoning: Early data on seat-belt use showed that seat-belt wearers were lesslikely to be killed in road accidents. Hence, it was initially believed that wearing a seat-belt increased survival chances in an accident. But what the early analysts had failed to see was that cautious drivers were more likely to wear the belts and were also less likely to cause ‘big accidents", while reckless drivers were more likely to beinvolved in 'big' accidents and were less-likely to wear the belts, which of the folio-wing, if true, could an opponent of the view presented above best cite as areason for recommending continued use of seat-belts?

A Careful drivers who are involved inaccidents caused by reckless drivers, would be more likely to survive if wearing a belt.

B All drivers should be required by law to wearabelt.

C The ratio of big to 'small road accidents is very small

D In fatal accidents seat-belt wearers in the front seat are less likely to survive than those wearing seatbelts in the backseat.

Solution

Correct Answer: Option A

Solution

Practice More Questions on Our App!

Related Topics