Q6 - To discourage congestion

[smiller]

Question Type:
Explain a Result

Stimulus Breakdown:
We aren't looking for an argument in the stimulus. We just want to understand the facts, paying particular attention to the unexpected result. In this case, we know that a city increased rates for on-street parking in a business district. The unexpected result is that businesses—specifically restaurants—saw an increase in sales afterward.

Answer Anticipation:
It's useful to notice that the city raised rates for "on-street" parking, but the restaurants' customers rely on "short-term" parking. Are we talking about the same parking spots here, or different ones? The correct answer might address this difference. The stimulus also states that parking rates were raised to discourage congestion, so maybe the decreased congestion encouraged more people to visit the restaurants. Correct answers for this type of question can be difficult to predict, but taking a moment to think of one or two possible solutions can help you anticipate the kind of scenario that could explain the surprise result.

Correct answer:
(D)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Out of Scope: This tells us that alternative parking is available, but it doesn't explain why sales would increase, especially if the alternative is more expensive than on-street parking.

(B) Out of Scope: It's not surprising that the owners opposed the increase, but more importantly, it doesn't explain why sales increased.

(C) Out of Scope: This would allow more spaces to be available for customers, but it doesn't explain why sales would increase as a result of the rate increase.

(D) Correct: A greater turnover in cars could mean that people aren't spending as much time at the restaurants. Parking is more expensive now, so you don't lounge around after your meal and chat over coffee. You eat your meal, get the check, and leave. This could allow the restaurants to serve more people, and lead to a small increase in sales.

(E) Opposite Function: At first glance, we would expect an increase in parking rates to cause the restaurants' sales to decrease. The increase in sales is surprising. If anything, answer choice (E) would support the expected result: "let's go to that restaurant at the mall instead of the one downtown. Parking is free at the mall!"

Takeaway/Pattern:
The correct answer to an Explain a Result question doesn't have to completely, by itself, explain the surprising result. This is even stated in the question stem. We're looking for the answer that "contributes" to an explanation. Working wrong-to-right is very effective here. The goal is to notice that the other answers do not help to explain the unexpected result.

#officialexplanation