#17 - In order to relieve traffic congestion, the city of

[Administrator]

Complete question explanation

Resolve the Paradox. The correct answer choice is (E)

The paradox here is that the city built a highway linking suburban areas to downtown specifically to relieve traffic congestion, but now the average commute time for workers in the downtown area has increased.

Right away we can flag that the stimulus is actually talking about two separate sources of traffic - first, the traffic between the suburbs and downtown, and second, the traffic within the downtown area. We are likely looking for an answer choice that uses this fact to explain the seeming discrepency.

Answer choice (A) - assuming this is true, it still doesn't explain why traffic increased, since these commuters now have a highway system to get them from the suburbs to downtown

Answer choice (B) - similar to (A) - this supports the idea that people are using the highway, which should have reduced traffic

Answer choice (C) - we don't know what effect new stoplights would have, but more importantly this is talking about suburban roads, while the stimulus states that traffic for the downtown workers commute has increased - so this doesn't help

Answer choice (D) - we don't know whether this road repair is done or if it impeded traffic, and similar to (C), this has to do with roads leading to downtown, it doesn't explain why there's more traffic within downtown

Answer choice (E) - This is the correct answer - it specifically states that traffic became more congested within roads on the downtown area, explaining how workers commuting within downtown now have longer commute times post-highway, even though that same highway reduced commute times for suburban commuters coming into downtown

[Zierra28]

Paradox question???

E: The new highway made it easier to traverse btw suburbs/city, but one in the burbs, the streets hadn't been adjusted for the now higher volume leaving the highways. As a result, THOSE streets became congested as well??

[Jonathan Evans]

Hi, Zierra,

In a paradox question, you need to identify the incongruous elements in the stimulus. In this case, how is it possible that even though the city built a new highway linking suburbs to downtown, the commute time for downtown workers increased?

Try to come up with a prephrase. For instance, you could imagine that once the new highway was completed, many workers who had been taking the train from the suburbs to downtown chose to start driving again, increasing congestion.

Basically, you need to find something that addresses both sides of the paradox, on the one hand there's a new highway; on the other hand commuting times have increased.

E addresses both sides here: Even though there's a new highway, traffic in downtown after exiting the highway became more congested, possibly raising overall commute time.

It is not necessary and perhaps inadvisable to introduce a causal assumption ("as a result") into your thinking to arrive at the correct answer.

[bli2016]

Hi, I chose C for this question because I thought that it adequately resolved the paradox. Is it wrong because it only mentions "several" suburban roads and not all of them? I understand why E resolves the paradox but I am still having trouble eliminating C. Thanks!

[Ricky_Hutchens]

Hi bli2016,

I think you are having trouble with C because you are assuming the new traffic lights are causing delays. Notice that the choice doesn't say that the stop lights are making the trips of the drivers longer. When you read C carefully, it becomes clear that you can't make this assumption because it says that the roads where upgraded with new stoplights, not that stoplights were added to the road. Imagine that there were 5 stoplights on the road before the highway was built, then they upgrade all five of those lights. C would still be an accurate statement, but there would be the same number of lights on the road before and after the highway was built and thus no reason to expect any additional delays.

[sw51]

Could you please explain why D isn't also a valid explanation? If the highways increased road volume into Gastner by 25% but the roads that account for the other 75% of volume have roadwork, then the avg commute time would likely increase.

[James Finch]

Hi SW,

The issue with (D) is that its scope doesn't align with what we have in the stimulus. Firstly, it states that the road work is being done while the highway is being built, not after it opened; also, it talks about important streets leading to downtown, not in the downtown. These streets could be the ones being relieved by the opening of the highway, potentially making the paradox even worse, especially if the road work was done by the time the highway opened.

(E) keeps the same scope, dealing with road conditions after the highway opened, and making sure those roads are near the new highway. If those roads are more congested, then the commute times could slow down.

[sw51]

Wow. I missed it was before completion. Yikes. Thanks

[anthonychernandez]

Can someone explain why B is incorrect?

Let's say a city is surrounded by small (population 1,000), medium (population 5,000) and large (population 15,000) suburbs. And the new highway is "most convenient" for the largest suburbs, meaning potentially thousands of more cars now have a straight-shot, easy, convenient commute into the city, explaining how the new highway could increase traffic downtown. That was my thinking with B.

[anthonychernandez]

I should add that one reason why I didn't choose E was because I didn't see any causality in it, and I'm used to looking for that in Paradox answer choices.