/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 25 Police statistics have shown tha... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91Ó°ÊÓ

91Ó°ÊÓ

Police statistics have shown that automobile antitheft devices reduce the risk of car theft, but a statistical study of automobile theft by the automobile insurance industry claims that cars equipped with antitheft devices are, paradoxically, more likely to be stolen than cars that are not so equipped. Which one of the following. if true, does the most to resolve the apparent paradox? (A) Owners of stolen cars almost invariably report the theft immediately to the police but tend to delay notifying their insurance company, in the hope that the vehicle will be recovered. (B) Most cars that are stolen are not equipped with antitheft devices, and most cars that are equipped with antitheft devices are not stolen. (C) The most common automobile antitheft devices are audible alarms, which typically produce ten false alarms for every actual attempted theft. (D) Automobile owners who have particularly theft-prone cars and live in areas of greatest incidence of car theft are those who are most likely to have antitheft devices installed. (E) Most automobile thefts are the work of professional thieves against whose efforts antitheft devices offer scant protection.

Short Answer

Expert verified
Option D best resolves the paradox by indicating that high-risk factors align with device presence.

Step by step solution

01

Understand the Paradox

The paradox suggests that while antitheft devices are supposed to reduce car theft, statistics show that cars with these devices are stolen more often. To resolve this, we must identify which option provides a plausible explanation for this contradiction.
02

Analyze Each Option

Review each option to see which one provides an explanation for why cars with antitheft devices are reported as being stolen more frequently.
03

Evaluate Option A

Option A suggests delays in reporting thefts to insurance companies. This does not explain the correlation between antitheft devices and increased theft.
04

Evaluate Option B

Option B states that most stolen cars do not have antitheft devices. This does not directly address why cars with devices are reported stolen more.
05

Evaluate Option C

Option C indicates that common antitheft devices often give false alarms. While this might impact perception of effectiveness, it doesn't resolve the statistical correlation.
06

Evaluate Option D

Option D explains that cars with antitheft devices are owned by people in high-risk areas or with theft-prone cars, which could lead to a higher incidence of theft despite the devices. This resolves the paradox by showing that these cars are simply more likely to be targeted.
07

Evaluate Option E

Option E suggests professional thieves can bypass devices. While valid, it doesn't focus on why the theft rate seems higher for equipped vehicles.
08

Conclusion

Option D provides the best explanation; although antitheft devices are present, the cars are still targeted more often due to being in high-risk areas or being theft-prone.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91Ó°ÊÓ!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Paradox Resolution
A paradox is a situation that contains seemingly contradictory elements. In this case, antitheft devices should theoretically decrease car theft, yet statistics suggest the opposite—cars with such devices are stolen more. This creates an apparent contradiction, or paradox. To resolve it, we must seek an underlying reason that reconciles these opposing facts.
Option D from the step-by-step solution holds the key. It tells us that individuals who live in high-theft areas or own particularly theft-prone vehicles are more likely to install antitheft devices. Therefore, while these devices may deter theft, the high inherent risk of theft due to location and type of vehicle leads to them being stolen regardless. By considering this, the paradox is resolved and makes logical sense.
Automobile Theft
Automobile theft is a significant issue worldwide, affecting individuals, insurance industries, and law enforcement. When examining theft statistics, it’s important to understand the various factors that contribute to these numbers. Vehicles can be stolen for parts, for resale, or simply for joyriding.
Several variables impact theft probability:
  • Location: Urban areas often report higher theft rates than rural ones, due to larger populations and more foot traffic.
  • Vehicle Type: Some car models are more attractive to thieves because of their resale value or parts availability.
  • Theft Prevention: The use and type of antitheft devices can also affect whether a car is likely to be stolen.
Considering these elements offers crucial insights into automobile theft statistics.
Antitheft Devices
Antitheft devices, such as alarms, immobilizers, and tracking systems, are designed to prevent or deter car theft. They are marketed with the promise of increased security but effectiveness can vary widely.
Common types of antitheft devices include:
  • Audible Alarms: Designed to scare away thieves, but often criticized for frequent false alarms.
  • Steering Wheel Locks: A visible deterrent, though not foolproof.
  • Immobilizers: Help prevent the car from being driven away without a proper key.
Despite these measures, determined and skilled thieves can sometimes circumvent even the most advanced systems. Thus, while antitheft devices can lower the likelihood of theft, they are not a guarantor of safety.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis in the context of automobile theft provides a quantitative approach to understanding crime trends. By evaluating various data points, stakeholders can identify patterns and develop strategies to combat theft.
Key elements of analysis include:
  • Data Collection: Gathering information on theft rates, types of vehicles involved, and regions most affected.
  • Correlation vs. Causation: Understanding the difference is crucial; not all correlations imply causation.
  • Risk Factors: Identifying and analyzing these factors helps in creating strategies that mitigate the risk of theft.
For instance, the contradiction between antitheft devices and increased theft rates could initially seem illogical. Yet upon deeper statistical evaluation, as shown in the paradox resolution, the analysis reveals deeper interconnections and factors at play.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Student representative: Our university, in expelling a student who verbally harassed his roommate, has erred by penalizing the student for doing what he surely has a right to do: speak his mind! Dean of students: But what you're saying is that our university should endorse verbal harassment. Yet surely if we did that, we would threaten the free flow of ideas that is the essence of university life. Which one of the following is a questionable technique that the dean of students uses in attempting to refute the student representative? (A) challenging the student representative's knowledge of the process by which the student was expelled (B) invoking a fallacious distinction between speech and other sorts of behavior (C) misdescribing the student representative's position, thereby making it easier to challenge (D) questioning the motives of the student representative rather than offering reasons for the conclusion defended (E) relying on a position of power to silence the opposing viewpoint with a threat

Sheila: Health experts generally agree that smoking a tobacco product for many years is very likely to be harmful to the smoker's health. Tim: On the contrary, smoking has no effect on health at all: although my grandfather smoked three cigars a day from the age of fourteen, he died at age ninety-six. A major weakness of Tim's counterargument is that his counterargument (A) attempts to refute a probabilistic conclusion by claiming the existence of a single counterexample (B) challenges expert opinion on the basis of specific information unavailable to experts in the field (C) describes an individual case that is explicitly discounted as an exception to the experts' conclusion (D) presupposes that longevity and health status are unrelated to each other in the general population (E) tacitly assumes that those health experts who are in agreement on this issue arrived at that agreement independently of one another

In 1990 major engine repairs were performed on 10 percent of the cars that had been built by the National Motor Company in the 1970 s and that were still registered. However, the corresponding figure for the cars that the National Motor Company had manufactured in the 1960 s was only five percent. Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain the discrepancy? (A) Government motor vehicle regulations generally require all cars, whether old or new, to be inspected for emission levels prior to registration. (B) Owners of new cars tend to drive their cars more carefully than do owners of old cars. (C) The older a car is, the more likely it is to be discarded for scrap rather than repaired when major engine work is needed to keep the car in operation. (D) The cars that the National Motor Company built in the 1970 s incorporated simplified engine designs that made the engines less complicated than those of earlier models. (E) Many of the repairs that were performed on the cars that the National Motor Company built in the 1960 s could have been avoided if periodic routine maintenance had been performed.

Defendants who can afford expensive private defense lawyers have a lower conviction rate than those who rely on court-appointed public defenders. This explains why criminals who commit lucrative crimes like embezzlement or insider trading are more successful at avoiding conviction than are street criminals. The explanation offered above would be more persuasive if which one of the following were true? (A) Many street crimes, such as drug dealing, are extremely lucrative and those committing them can afford expensive private lawyers. (B) Must prosecutors are not competent to handle cases involving highly technical financial evidence and have more success in prosecuting cases of robbery or simple assault. (C) The number of criminals convicted of street crimes is far greater than the number of criminals convicted of embezzlement or insider trading- (D) The percentage of defendants who actually committed the crimes of which they are accused is no greater for publicly defended than for privately defended defendants. (E) Juries, out of sympathy for the victims of crimes, are much more likely to convict defendants accused of violent crimes than they are to convict defendants accused of "victimless" crimes or crimes against property.

In a study of the effect of radiation from nuclear weapons plants on people living in areas near them, researchers compared death rates in the areas near the plants with death rates in areas that had no such plants. Finding no difference in these rates, the researchers concluded that radiation from the nuclear weapons plants poses no health hazards to people living near them. Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the researchers' argument? (A) Nuclear power plants were not included in the study. (B) The areas studied had similar death rates before and after the nuclear weapons plants were built. (C) Exposure to nuclear radiation can cause many serious diseases that do not necessarily result in death. (D) Only a small number of areas have nuclear weapons plants. (E) The researchers did not study the possible health hazards of radiation on people who were employed at the nuclear weapons plants if those employees did not live in the study areas.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on English Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.