Question 36·Hard·Inferences
Urban analyst Carmen Vilalta examined Barcelona’s first six superblocks—contiguous clusters of nine city blocks whose interior streets are closed to through-traffic and prioritized for pedestrians. Six months after implementation, sensors showed that average weekday automobile counts fell 42 percent on interior streets while rising only 8 percent on perimeter avenues. Emergency-response times citywide were statistically unchanged. Hospital data revealed a 35 percent drop in pedestrian injuries inside the superblocks, with no significant change on bordering avenues. Finally, surveys indicated that 78 percent of residents living inside a superblock reported visiting neighborhood shops more frequently, compared with 22 percent of residents citywide. Together, these findings most strongly suggest that ______
Which choice most logically completes the text?
For “Together, these findings most strongly suggest that…” questions, first jot down the key trends in your own words (e.g., “big drop inside, small change outside, no negative side effects, more local use”). Then test each choice against all of those trends, eliminating any option that contradicts a number, overstates the effect (words like “merely,” “enough to counteract”), or introduces new information the passage never mentions. Usually, the correct answer will be a restrained, general conclusion that lines up cleanly with every piece of given evidence.
Hints
Use all the data, not just one piece
Before looking at the options, briefly list what happens to interior traffic, perimeter traffic, injuries, and shopping. The right answer should fit with all of these, not just one.
Compare interior vs. perimeter traffic changes
Focus on the 42% drop in interior traffic and the 8% rise on perimeter avenues. Ask yourself: does that look like a one-to-one shift, or something else?
Watch for claims the passage never mentions
Some choices add ideas about causes or effects (like who the shoppers are or whether safety worsens somewhere) that the paragraph never states. Eliminate any answer that relies on information not supported by the given data.
Step-by-step Explanation
Clarify what the question is asking
The last sentence stem says, “Together, these findings most strongly suggest that ______.”
This means you must choose the option that gives a general conclusion supported by all the specific data points in the paragraph (traffic counts, injuries, and shopping behavior). It’s an inference question: you are not restating a line but drawing a reasonable overall takeaway.
Summarize the key findings
Pull out the main numbers and what they show:
- Interior streets in superblocks: automobile counts fell 42%.
- Perimeter avenues: automobile counts rose only 8%.
- Emergency-response times: no statistically significant change citywide.
- Pedestrian injuries inside superblocks: dropped 35%.
- Pedestrian injuries on bordering avenues: no significant change.
- Shopping: 78% of residents inside a superblock reported visiting neighborhood shops more often, versus 22% citywide.
So: big improvements inside superblocks (less car traffic, fewer injuries, more local shopping) and no matching worsening on the edges or citywide.
Test each answer choice against the data
Now compare each option to those findings.
-
Choice B says the main effect is “merely” shifting traffic from inside to outside, with overall traffic “essentially unchanged.” But traffic dropped 42% inside and rose only 8% on the perimeter, which is not an equal trade; there is no support for “merely” displacement or unchanged overall volume.
-
Choice C claims safety on perimeter avenues gets worse enough to cancel out safety gains inside. The passage explicitly says there was no significant change in pedestrian injuries on bordering avenues, so this is directly contradicted.
-
Choice D claims increased shopping inside superblocks is driven mainly by outsiders. The only data we get are about residents inside superblocks vs residents citywide. We’re told 78% of inside residents shop more often; we’re told nothing about shoppers from outside coming in, so this claim is unsupported.
Only one remaining choice matches the traffic pattern—large reduction inside with only a small increase outside—and stays within what the data actually say.
Match the supported conclusion to the correct choice
The numbers show that car traffic inside superblocks drops a lot, while car traffic on the perimeter rises only a little, and there is no evidence of major negative side effects. That is exactly what Choice A states: implementing superblocks effectively reduces automobile traffic within their boundaries without causing a comparable surge in traffic at their perimeters.
So the correct answer is A.