Part Three: Question Type Review

Chapter 7

DATA INTERPRETATION TEST

Questions 1-4 refer to the following chart.

FOREST LAND BY REGION IN THE

CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES

Land Area Area Forested Percent

Region ( 1,000 acres) (1,000 acres) Forested
New England 40,119 32,460 81
Mid Atlantic 87,813 50,686 58
Lake States 207,952 53,011 25
Central 241,425 42,871 18
South 474,906 185,514 39
Pacific Coast 570,253 214,274 38
Rocky Mountain 546,959 136,378 25
Total U.S. 2, 169,427 715,194 33

1. Which of the regions listed has the least 3. Approximatelywhat percent of all the forested
amount of forested land? land in the contiguous United States lies in
New England either New England or the Mid-Atlantic Region?
0
0 Lake States 0 8%

0 Central 0 10%
0 Pacific Coast 0 12%
0 Rocky Mountain 0 15%
0 20%
2. What is the approximate ratio of the amount
of forested land in the South to the amount of 4. If 250,000 acres in the Lake States are urban
forested land in New England? and the land that is neither urban nor forested
is farmland, then approximately what percent
0 1: 2
of the land area of the Lake States is farmland?
0 2: 1
0 25%
0 1:6
0 49%
0 6: 1
0 51%
0 12: 1
0 62%
0 74%
 Part Three: Question Type Review I 315
Data Interpretation

Questions 5-9 refer to the following graphs.

NEW YORI< AND WISCONSIN: POPULATION BY OFFICIAL CENSUS

1920-1980

20,000 5,000

18,000 "'II, ~ 4,500

v
G'
·~ 16,000
/ "'"' . "'"'.
4,000
G'
Q

C/)
t>
0
::cE--< 14,000
~¢"""" p:I p
.... .
""
/
/ - - .. New York (left-hand scale)
3,500
~
0
~
·~
"J ~
~ 12,000 ~" 3,000
z0
g 10,000
»>
" ""
""
~ -> 2,500
z
0

g
P-< == Wisconsin (right-hand scale) P-<
0 8,000 2,000 0
P-< P-<

~ ~
C/)
0
::,-,
6,000 1,500 z
0
o
~ 4,000 1,000
C/)

z ~
2,000 500

0
1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980

Note: Drawn to scale.

DENSITY OF POPULATION BY STATE

(Per square mile, land area only)

State 1920 1960 1970 1980

Arkansas 33.4 34.2 37.0 43.9

Illinois 115.7 180.4 199.4 205.3

New York 217.9 350.6 381.3 370.6

Texas 17.8 36.4 42.7 54.3

Wisconsin 47.6 72.6 81.1 86.5

 Part Three: Question Type Review
316
Chapter 7

5. What was the least densely populated of the 8. If in 1830the density of New Yorkwas 44 people
listed states in 1960? per square mile, and the area of NewYorkhas
C)
stayed constant since then, approximately
Arkansas
what was the population of New Yorkin 1830,
C) Illinois in millions?
C) New York C) 1.2
C) Texas C) 2.0
C) Wisconsin C) 3.5
C) 4.0
6. In 1920, approximately how many more people
C) 4.8
were living in New York than in Wisconsin, in
millions?
9. Which of the following statements can be
0 0.5
inferred from the information in the graph and
C) 1 table?
C) 3
I. Since 1920, the population of NewYork
0 7.8 has always been more than twice the pop-
C) 10 ulation of Wisconsin.
II. Between 1960 and 1970, the percent
7. In 1930,what was the approximate ratio of the increase in Wisconsin's population was
number of people living in Wisconsin to the greater than its percent increase in popula-
number of people living in New York? tion between 1920 and 1930.
0 1 :6 III. Of the states listed, New York had the
largest increase in population between
C) 1: 5
1920 and 1980.
0 5 :6
O Ionly
0 6:5
O II only
C) 4: 1
O III only
C) I and II only
O I and III only
 Part Three: Question Type Review I 3171
Data Interpretation

Questions Hl-13 refer to the following information.

AFRICAN LANGUAGES OF KENYA BY LINGUISTIC FAMILY

NUMBER OF MOTHER-TONGUE SPEAKERS1

I. Major Bantoid Languages II. Major Nilotic Languages Ill. Major Kushitic Languages

1. Kikuyu 4,602,000 A. Western Nilotic 1. Somali 225,000

2. Luhya 3,045,000 1. Luo 2,810,000
3. l<amba 2,479,000 B. Eastern Nilotic
4. Gusii 1,356,000 1. l<alenjin 2,374,000
5. Meru 1,207,000 2. Masai 346,000
6. Nyika 1,053,000 3. Turkana 297,000
7. Embu 260,000 4. Sambur 106,000

TOTAL 14,002,000 TOTAL 5,933,000 TOTAL 225,000

Mother-Tongue Speakers of Unlisted African Languages 1,309,000

Population of Kenya 22,020,0002

1AII
Kenyans are assumed to have exactly one mother tongue.
lncludes speakers of non-African languages as mother tongue.
2

10. Other than mother-tongue speakers of an 12. What is the approximate ratio of mother-
unlisted language, how many Kenyans have an tongue Masai speakers to mother tongue
Eastern Nilotic language as their mother tongue? Turkana and mother tongue Sambur speakers
combined in Kenya?
C) 106,000
C) 2,374,000 C) 3: 1
C) 2,810,000 C) 7:6
C) 3,123,000 C) 1: 1
C) '5,933,000
C) 3:4
C) 7:8
11. Approximately what percent of the Kenyan
population has as their mother tongue one of 13. According to the table, approximately what
the seven listed Bantoid languages? percent of the population of Kenya has a non-
African mother tongue?
C) 47%
C) 0.25%
C) 52%
C) 1.3%
C) 64%
C) 2.5%
C) 67%
C) 5.0%
C) 70%
C) It cannot be determined from the
information given
 1
\'.;!
·~ l

Part Three: Question Type Review

Chapter 7

Questions 14-19 refer to the following graphs.

I
ADVERTISING EXPENDITURES, 1980-1988
Ii
11.5
·§
,-..:i
11.0
0
Q 10.5
µ.,
0 10.0
(/)

z0 9.5
a
>-<
p'.1
9.0

ti 8.5
vi
~ 8.0
~
r<
>-< 7.5
Q
~ 7.0

~ 6.5
6.0
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
YEAR

Newspapers 16% Magazines 21 %

Local Radio 6%

Miscellaneous 3%

Local Television 23%

Network T devision 31 %

ADVERTISING EXPENDITURES, 1984

 Part Three: Question Type Review I
319
Data Interpretation

14. In which of the following years was the least 17. Approximately how much more was spent in
amount spent on advertising? 1984 for advertising in magazines than on
advertising in newspapers?
C) 1984
C) $24 million
C) 1985
C) $49 million
C) 1986
C) $150 million
C) 1987
C) $350 million
C) 1988
C) $490 million
15. Approximately how much was spent on
magazine advertisements in 1984,in billions 18. If in 1984billboards accounted for 25 percent
of dollars? of the miscellaneous advertising expenditures,
approximately what were the advertising
0 1.05 expenditures on billboards in millions of
0 2.1 dollars?
0 2.6 C) 50
0 3.7 C) 62
0 4.2 C) 74
C) 79
16. In 1984,what was the ratio of the amount
spent on newspaper advertising to the amount C) 89
spent on local radio advertising?
19. If the amount spent for advertising on network
C) 3:2 television doubled from 1980 to 1984,
C) 8:3 approximately what percent of the advertising
C)
dollar was spent on network television in 1980?
5:2
C) 2:1 C) 15.5%
C) 3:2 0 23%
0 31%
0 33%
0 39%
 ill'
i
i~
ii
),j
!, Part Three: Question Type Review
n 320
Ii Chapter 7
if
n
11
(

ii
n
i
H
q"
II

Questions 20-24 refer to the following graphs,

SHIP INSPECTIONS AT PORT P

(in thousands of ships)
16
CJ Foreign Ships Domestic Ships
14

:J: U)
Q
I 12
~
~
0
::c 10
E---<

~
(/)
P-< 8
5::
(/)
µ,
0 6
~
µ-1
~
::;8
4
~

0
1966 1967 1968 1969 1970
YEAR
Note: Drawn to scale.

DOMESTIC-SHIP INSPECTIONS AT PORT P BY TYPE, 1970

Other 9%

Passenger 23%

Military 27%

Industrial 25%

Tugboats 16%

Note: Drawn to scale.

 Part Three: Question Type Review I 321
Data Interpretation

20. In 1969,the ratio of domestic ships inspected 23. In each of the years 1971 and 1972, the number
to foreign ships inspected was approximately of domestic industrial ships inspected
increased over the previous year by 30 percent.
9 Approximatelyhow many domestic industrial
0-
4 ships were inspected in 1972?
2
0 - 0 5,320
1 .· i
0 5,490
5
0 0 5,600
3
8 0 5,720
0
5 0 5,890
4
0
3 24. In 1970, approximatelyhow many more
domestic passenger ships were inspected than
21. If in 1967, 12 percent of the foreign ships domestic tugboats at port P?
inspected were French, approximatelyhow
0 820
many French ships were inspected?
0 855
0 700
0 890
0 800
0 910
0 900
0 955
0 1,200
0 1,900

22. If the average ship carries 500 tons of cargo,

which of the following is closest to the number
of tons of cargo inspected at Port Pin 1968? :1
11
I
0 1.0 million
0 2.0 million i'ii
0 4.0 million I
0 8.0 million
C)
I
16.0 million

I
I
'!
I

' I
 Part Three: Question Type Review
Chapter 7

Questions 25-29 refer to the following graph.

GOVERNMENT BUDGET, COUNTRY X

(in million of dollars)

20,000
D 1982- 1933 Ill 1987-1988
18,000

16,000

14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

National Health and Post Transportation Veteran's Payments to

Defense Welfare Office Affairs Provinces

Note: Drawn toscale

 Part Three: Question Type Review
Data Interpretation
I 323

25. In Country X, approximately how much more 28. If the percent increase in national defense
was spent on national defense in fiscal year spending over the next five-year period exactly
1987-88 than in fiscal year 1982-83? matches the percent increase between the two
given fiscal years, what must be the approximate
0 $1.5 billion level of defense spending during fiscal year
1992-93?
0 $1.8 billion

0 $2.0 billion 0 $6.0 billion

0 $2.5 billion 0 $8.5 billion

0 $2.9 billion 0 $9.0 billion

0 $9.7 billion
26. What was the approximate ratio of spending
on national defense to spending on health and
0 $10.2 billion

welfare in fiscal year 1987-88?

29. How many of the given categories did NOT see
0 1 :4 an increase of at least 25 percent in 1987-88
0 1: 3 over 1982-83?

0 2:5 O O
0 3: 1 0 1

0 4: 1 0 2
0 3
27. Which of the following departments
experienced the greatest percent increase in
0 6
spending between fiscal years 1982-83 and
1987-88?

C) National Defense
C) Health and Welfare

0 Post Office

0 Transportation

0 Payments to Provinces
 Part Three: Question Type Review
324
Chapter 7

Questions 30-34 refer to the following information.

DISTRIBUTION OF AGES OF AMERICANS 55 YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER

1960 1980

AGES 65-74 AGES 65-74

AGES 55-64 AGES 55-64
34%
48%

85ANDOVER 85ANDOVER

3.6% 6.7%

1960 Population of U.S.: 179,323,000 1980 Population of U.S.: 226,505,000

Total Number 55 or older: 32, 134,000 Total Number 55 or older: 47,247,000

30. In 1960, how many Americans were there 31. How many of the given categories saw an
between the ages of 55 and 64 inclusive? increase in their number in 1980 over 1960?

0 15.4 million O O
0 16.2 million C) 1
0 21.6 million C) 2

0 86.0 million C) 3

0 92.0 million C) 4
 Part Three: Question Type Review I 325
Data Interpretation

·[,:.:·
·,11'

32. In 1960, approximately how many more 34. Approximately how many of the Americans
Americans were there between the ages of 65 who were between the ages of 55 and 64 11
!.
and 74 inclusive than between 75 and 84 inclusive in 1960 were still alive in 1980? 'IiiIi:.
inclusive?
0 6 million ·:i
0 4.8 million '•':!I'!
0 8 million
,
0 5.2 million
0 10 million
0 6.3 million
0 12 million
0 7.2 million
O It cannot be determined from the infor-
0 8.3 million mation given

33. In 1980, approximately what percent of the

total population of the United States was
between the ages of 65 and 74 inclusive?

0 4%
0 7%
0 9%
0 16%
0 32%

L
 Part Three: Question Type Review
326
Chapter 7

DATA INTERPRETATION
ANSWERS AND EXPLANATIONS

Forest Land in United States 4. 74%

Watch your units here: the number of acres of urban
This is a pretty straightforward table; the only thing to
land mentioned in the problem is given in acres, while
. remember is that all the entries are in thousands of
all the figures in the table are in thousands of acres.
acres.
Since 250,000 acres is just 250 thousand acres, let's be
consistant with the chart, and just use 250 for the area
1. New England
of the urban land. The total area of forested and urban
Scan the "Area Forested" column for the smallest value. land in the Lake States is 53,011 + 250 or 53,261
New England has the smallest entry: 32,460 thousand acres. Now we can really use our answer choices here.
acres; therefore, it is the answer. We know that 53,011 is 25 percent of 207,952, since
we're told that the percent forested in the Lake States is
2. 6: 1 25%. Now is 53,261 going to be a substantially
Look up the area forested for the two regions, then look different percent? Of course not-it's really very close.
at the answer choices to see which matches their ratio. So the amount that's forested plus the amount that's
Since the answer choices are pretty widely spread, we urban will be just slightly more than 25 percent. Then
can estimate freely. The South has 185,514 thousand what about the percent that is farmland? This is the land
acres of forested land; New England 32,460 thousand that is neither urban nor forested, so it is everything
acres. The ratio is about 180,000 to 30,000, which except that urban and forested land. Since a little more
reduces to 6 : 1. than 25 percent was urban and forested, a little less
than 100%-25%, or a little less than 75% must be
3. 12% farmland. The only choice that is close to that is 74%.
This is more difficult since our answer choices are all
bunched between 8 'and 20 percent; we have to be New York and Wisconsin Population
fairly exact in our estimation. Reading the first two
There's a great deal of information given to us in one
figures in the "Area Forested" column, we see that there
graph and one table. The graph concerns only
are 32,460 thousand forested acres in New England
Wisconsin and New York; the table concerns the
and 50,686 thousand in the South, for a total of about
densities of five different states. In the graph, the solid
83,000 thousand acres. We want to know what percent
line refers to Wisconsin and the right-hand scale; the
this represents of all the forested land in the contiguous
dotted line refers to New York and the left-hand scale.
,1. United States. (Contiguous means touching, so it
Keep in mind that everything is given in thousands on
means all the states that touch each other: everything
the graph.
except Hawaii and Alaska.) We're told the total area of
forested land at the bottom of the table- 715, 194
5. Arkansas
:I' '· thousand acres. Clearly 83,000 thousand is a little more
than one tenth of 715,000; therefore, choice 3 (12%) We need only use the table for this question; that gives
and choice 4 ( 15%) are the only two that might be us information on population density. Look down the
correct. Fifteen percent looks easier to work with than column for 1960, and find the state with the smallest
12 percent, so let's see whether that can be right. Ten density. It's. Arkansas, with 34.2 people per square mile.
percent of 700,000 would be 70,000, and 5 percent
would be half of that, or 35,000. Therefore, 15 percent
would be about 70,000 + 35,000 or 105,000. Well
this is far too much, so 12%, must be right.
 Part Three: Question Type Review 1·
Data Interpretation 327

6. 7.8 9. I only
Now we refer only to the graph; we don't need the Evaluate the three statements. Statement I is true, since
table. Find the vertical line for 1920; it's the first one in the smallest population for New York over the period
from the left. Now move up until you find the Jines. The was about l O million, while the largest population for
solid line is Wisconsin, and reading the right-hand scale Wisconsin was less than half of that-about 4.6 million.
we see that Wisconsin's population was approximately Statement I must be a part of the answer; choices 2
2250 thousand, or 2.25 million. New York's dotted line and 3 can be eliminated.
is a little above Wisconsin's solid line; reading to the left-
hand scale, we find that New York's 1920 population Statement II is a little harder. The percent increase is the
was approximately 10,000 thousand, or 1 O million. The ratio of the amount of increase to the original whole. So
difference is 10 million-2.25 million, or approximately there are two things we're interested in. Looking at the
7.75 million. solid line for the two periods, we see that the amount of
change between 1960 and 1970 was about the same
7. 1: 5 as the amount of change between 1920 and 1930.
We need the ratio of the number in Wisconsin in 1930 What does that tell us about the percent increase 7 Well,
to the number in New York in 1930. Because of the the population in 1960 was much greater than the
different scales, we can't estimate the ratios by population in 1920, so the original whole in 1960 was
comparing the respective heights of the two graphs; we greater than the original whole in 1920. So we have the
need to find the actual figures. The New York population same approximate amount of increase for the two
in 1930 was approximately 13,000 thousand, or 13 periods, but since we started at a smaller number in
million. In Wisconsin, it was about 2600 thousand, or 1920 than in 1960, the percent increase for the earlier
about 2.6 million. The ratio of Wisconsin to New York, period must be greater than the percent increase for
then, is approximately 2.6 : 13, or about 1 : 5. the later period. In other words, statement II is not true.
At this point, we can eliminate everything except
8. 2.0 choices 1 and 5.

You have to reason with proportions here while also

Evaluating statement Ill depends on understanding
using the given table. Our table tells us New York's
what the density figures mean. If we look at the change
density for various years. The question gives us the
in the density figures, we can determine the largest
density for 1830. The density of the state is the ratio of
increase in population per square mile for the period
the population to the amount of land; if the amount of
discussed. But does that translate to the largest
land stays constant, then the density will increase at the
population growth? Not necessarily. We need
same rate as the population. Now we could work with
information about the areas of the states in order to
any of the density figures given in the chart, but it's
answer the question. Texas, for instance, is a much
probably easiest to work with 1920s: New York's
larger state than New York, so it's possible that the
population in 1920 was approximately 1 O million
smaller amount of increase per square mile in Texas
people, a very nice round number to work with. In
would translate to a larger overall increase, because
addition, the 1830 density was 44 people per square
there are more square miles to be considered. So
mile: very close to one-fifth of the 1920 density, 217.9
statement Ill is not inferable based on the information
people per square mile. That means the 1830
given. Statement I was the only acceptable inference.
population must have been about one-fifth of the 1920
population. The 1920 population was about 1 O million,
so the 1830 population must have been approximately
i of l O million or 2 million people.
j ................................_. ~~

Part Three: Question Type Review

328
Chapter 7

African Languages 12. 7: 8

The answer choices aren't real close together here, so we
This was a difficult graph. The information is broken down
can estimate again. We want the ratio of Masai speakers
and presented in a couple of different places, plus there
to Turkana and Sambur combined. These are all Eastern
are notes at the bottom. There are at least three different
Nilotic languages, so it's the Nilotic column we're
linguistic families of Kenyan languages: Bantoid, Nilotic,
interested in. This tells us that there are 346,000 mother
and Kushitic, and we're given a breakdown of the major
tongue Masai speakers in Kenya, or about 350,000. The
· languages within each of those families. It's important to
number of Turkana and Samburu mother tongue
realize that all those numbers are mother-tongued
speakers is 297,000 + 106,000 or about 400,000. The
speakers, and the note at the bottom tells us that each
. . 350,000 35 7 .
Kenyan is assumed to have exactly one mother tongue. ratio we want rs about or
Below this chart we get the number of mother-tongue
400,000 40
=
8 or 7 · 8.
speakers of unlisted African languages. Note that some of 13. 2.5%
these unlisted African languages could fall into one of the To find what percent of the total population has a non-
families outlined above; the lists above are only of the African mother tongue, we need two pieces of
major languages. So a Kenyan with an African mother information: the total population of Kenya, and the
tongue could be listed in a couple of different places: number of non-African mother tongue speakers. The
either someplace on the chart, or else with the other first piece we can find pretty easily; we're told that there
unlisted African language speakers. Does this take care of are 22,020,000 people in Kenya. It's a bit harder to find
everyone who lives in Kenya, then? No, so far we have the number of non-African mother tongue speakers.
only dealt with those who have African mother tongues. The information in the table gives us the speakers of
Some could have a non-African mother tongue: English, the major Bantoid, major Nilotic, and major Kushitic
for instance. And we see confirmation of this: the note that languages. These are all African languages, since the
goes with the total population of Kenya, tells us that the title of the chart tells us that they're African. In addition,
popula-tion includes speakers of non-African languages. the information below the chart tells us that there are
1,309,000 mother-tongue speakers of unlisted African
10. 3, 123,000
languages. Then all the African mother tongue speakers
At the bottom of the Nilotic (Nila-Saharan) column we must be listed in one of these places, and if we add up
see there are 5,933,000 speakers of Nilotic languages the totals, we'll get the total having an African mother
total. Of these 2,810,000 speak Luo, a Western Nilotic tongue. Subtracting that from the total population of
language, while the rest are the Eastern Nilotic speakers Kenya will leave us with the number of non-African
we're interested in. Subtract the Luo speakers from the mother-tongue speakers: just what we want.
total to find the number of Eastern Nilotic speakers, but
do it roughly to save time. (The answer choices aren't Adding up the numbers in the chart, we find that for the
that close together.) The difference is a little more than three language groups listed, the total of the major
3 million; 3, 123,000 must be our answer. languages is 14,002,000 + 5,933,000 + 225,000 or
approximately 20,225,000. Adding the speakers of
11. 64% unlisted African languages, we get 20,225,000 +
The percent will be the total number of speakers for the 1 ,309,000 or approximately 21,500,000. Subtracting
seven listed Bantoid languages divided by the total this from the total population of Kenya, we find that
population of Kenya. At the bottom of the first column, there are approximately 500,000 mother-tongue
the total number of Bantoid speakers is about 14 speakers of non-African languages.
million, while the total population of the country is
All that's left now is to divide this into the total
.
about 22 million. So the percent we want 1s aroun
d 14
22. 500,000 . I
population We get or approximate y
2 2 . 22,020,000
This fraction must be a little LESS than
3 or 663%, --2_ or -1-. Since this is slightly larger than or 20/o,
since __!_=1-. = ~- The best choice is 640/o. 220 44 510
21 3
the best answer choice must be 2.5%.
 Part Three: Question Type Review J
329
Data Interpretation

Advertising Expenditures 1984 expenditures. To see this, if we let E represent the

expenditures, then the difference is
Again, a pretty straightforward set of graphs; nothing too
tricky. It's important to note two things about the bar 210/o(f) - 160/o(f) = (210/o - 160/o)f = 50/o(f)
graph at the top: the expenditures are in billions of
From the bar graph we see all expenditures totaled just
dollars, and the graph does not begin at zero; six billion is
the lowest point. This indicates that we can't estimate under l O billion dollars in 1984. The fractional form of
ratios directly from the bar graph. The pie chart refers
only to the 1984 expenditures; we are given no
50',o .rs l sot h e diff
I erence .ts Just
. un d er l o f lO
20, 20
information about the breakdown of expenditures for billion or 500 million.
other years.
18. 74
14. 1985
We first find the miscellaneous expenditures for 1984,
Straightforward graph reading. Don't bother with exact and then find the billboard expenditures from that. The
amounts here; just find the shortest bar for the year pie chart tells us the miscellaneous expenditures were
listed. Of the years listed, 1985 is the shortest. 3 percent; since the total expenditures were just less
than l O billion, the miscellaneous expenditures were a
15. 2.1 little less than 30/o x l O billion or a little less than 300
Find the total amount spent on advertising in 1984 million.
from the bar graph, then multiply this by the percent
spent on magazines, which is found in the pie chart. The billboard expenditures were 25 percent or i of this,
You can estimate here also because the answer choices for a total of about 75 million.
are widely spaced. The bar graph shows just under 10
billion dollars was spent on advertising in 1984. The pie 19. 230/o
chart shows 210/o or just more than a fifth of this amount
went to magazines. i x l O billion is 2 billion; the amount
We're told that the amount spent on network television
doubled from 1980 to 1984, not the percent. First we
spent was close to $2 billion. need to find what was spent on network television in
1984, then we take half of that to get the 1980
16. 8: 3 expenditures, and finally we can estimate what percent
Don't find the actual amounts. From the pie chart we of the total 1980 expenditures that represents. The pie
can see that 160/o was spent on newspapers and 60/o chart shows 31 percent of all 1984 expenditures went
was spent on local radio. The ratio is just the ratio of to network television. Expenditures were just less than
these two percents, because they're percents of the $10 billion, so network television expenditures in 1984
same amount, the total amount spent on advertising. were just less than 3 10/o of $10 billion, or about $3
billion. In 1980 they were half this or about $1.5 billion.
160/o 16 8 Now we need to find what percent of the total
60/o 6 3 expenditures for 1980 this $1.5 billion represented. The
total expenditures in 1980 were about $6.6 billion.
17. 490 million Then the percent was about

We know from the pie chart that 21 percent of the 1 .5 billion 1 .5 5

1984 expenditures went to magazines and 16 percent 6.6 billion 6.6 22
went to newspapers. Since these are percents of the
same whole, the difference in the amounts will be
}2 is a bit less than i or a bit less than 25%. Only
21 - 16 or 5 percent of the whole, or 5 percent of the choice 2, 230/o, is close.
 Part Three: Question Type Review
330
Chapter 7

Ship Inspections So the answer must be a bit less than 960. Choice 3 is
the only possibility here.
This is a double bar graph, along with a pie chart. We
can tell quickly that the domestic-ship inspections are You may have approximated even more here, saying
always greater than the foreign-ship inspections (at least that 12 percent of 8 thousand is a little more than 10
over the five-year period shown on the graph). The bar percent of 8 thousand, or a little more than 800. The
graph starts at zero (and is drawn to scale), so if only problem with that is that 8 thousand was a little
necessary, we can estimate ratios from the bars directly. too high initially; the actual value is a little less than 8
The pie chart, of course, refers only to the inspections in thousand. So what you would be looking for is
1970, and only for domestic ships. In addition, we know something a little more than 10 percent of something a
nothing about how many ships actually travelled little less than 8 thousand. It's getting pretty confusing at
through the port (although this didn't come up in a this point already; plus, if you figure that the little more
question). Probably the most annoying thing about this and the little less cancel each other out, you could end
graph set was that some of the questions had answer up with 800 as your answer. In which case you would
choices that were pretty close together; requiring be wrong. The problem here is that the choices are
caution when estimating. spread far enough apart for us to do some rounding
and estimation, but they're too close together for us to
4 do a lot of estimation.
20. 3
As we said, since the bar graph is drawn to scale, and 22. 8.0 million
since the bars start at zero, we can do some quick Add the number of domestic ships inspected in 1968
estimation to narrow down our choices. In 1969, more to the number of foreign, then multiply the total
domestic ships were inspected than foreign ships (not number of ships inspected by 500 tons to get the total
too surprising, since that's true for every year on the tonnage. Approximately 11,000 domestic ships were
graph). So the ratio must be more than one. The solid inspected in 1968, and approximately 5,000 foreign
bar is considerably less than twice the length of the ships, for a total of about 16,000 ships. The tonnage
shaded bar, so we can see that the answer can't be per ship was 500 tons, so the total tonnage was 16,000
choice ( 1) or (2). Reading from the top of the 1969 x 500. Since 500 is one-half of 1,000, we can simplify
solid bar over to the left, we see that a little more than our arithmetic by doubling 500, and multiplying 16,000
12 thousand domestic ships were inspected. Reading
by J__. This gives us a total of 1,000 X 8,000 =
from the shaded bar to the left, we see that around 9 2
thousand foreign ships were inspected. So the answer 8,000,000 or 8 million tons.
is a little more than the ratio of 12 to 9, or a little less
12 12 d d 4 c hoice . 5 ts. b est. 23. 5,490
t han - 9 • Since I - 9 can be re uce to -,
3 Here we need both the graph and the pie chart. We can
find the number of domestic industrial ship inspections
21. 900
in 1970 by the combination of the two, then we can
Find the number of foreign ships that were inspected in
use the information in the question stem to extrapolate
1967, then take 12 percent of that amount. Foreign
to the number for 1972. The answer choices are pretty
ships are represented by the shaded bars; the 1967
close together again, so we should be careful with our
shaded bar is somewhere between 7 and 8 thousand.
Let's say a little less than 8 thousand, and see where estimations. In 1970, 25 percent or i of the domestic-
that gets us. The answer choices aren't widely spread, ship inspections were industrial ships. We learn that
but they're not too close together either. Approximately from the pie chart. In 1970, the total number of
what is 12 percent of 8 thousand? domestic-ship inspections was about 13 thousand. We
know that from the bar graph. Putting the two pieces of
12
100
x 8000 = 12 X 80 = 960 information together, we see that approximately i of 13
 Part Three: Question Type Rev(ew J

Data Interpretation 331

thousand or about 3,250 domestic industrial ships 26. 1 : 3

were inspected in 1970. Then in 1971, 30 percent All we need to do is count the height of each bar. The
more domestic industrial ships were inspected than in National Defense solid bar goes up 3 spaces; the Health
1970. 30 percent of 3,250 is the same as 3 x 325 or and Welfare solid bar goes up 9 spaces. We want the
975. So the increase from 1970 to 1971 was 975 ratio of defense to health and welfare, so the ratio is 3 to
ships. This makes the 1971 total 3,250 + 975 or 4,225 I'•

ships. Then in 1972 it increased by 30 percent. Now

9 or 1 : 3. Naturally, we get the same answer if we
actually determine the values. Reading the 1987-1988 :1
I
whafs 30 percent of 4,225? Well, 30% of 4,000 is national defense bar, it's clear that the amount of 1'
130 ..
of 4,000 or 1,200. 30% of 225 is a little more than 30% spending for that year was about 6 billion dollars.
of 200 which is 60. So 30% of 4,225 is a little more Spending in health and welfare was a lot more, or
than 1,200 + 60 or 1,260. So in 1972, a little more than reading its towering bar, about 18 billion. The ratio is 6
4,225 + 1,260 or 5.485 ships were inspected. billion to 18 billion, which is the same as 1 : 3.

27. Post Office

24. 910
Here we have to be careful we know what we're looking
Again, we need both the graph and the pie chart. The for. We want the greatest percent increase; this is very
simplest approach here is this: we are taking percents of different from the greatest amount of increase. We're
the same whole; therefore, the difference in the two not looking for the greatest difference in the heights of
amounts is the same as the difference in the percents, the two bars; we're looking for the largest ratio. For
multiplied by the whole. The whole here is the number instance, Health and Welfare had a very large absolute
of 1970 domestic-ship inspections, or 13 thousand difference, but its percent increase was not that great,
ships. The percents are 23 percent for domestic since it started so high. Its percent increase certainly
passenger ships and 16 percent for domestic tugboats; wasn't as high as Transportation's, for instance, which
giving us a difference of 23 - 16 or 7 percent. more than doubled between the two years. So what is
Therefore, we want 7 percent of 13 thousand. Again, the the answer? It's best to estimate first, and narrow down
choices are fairly close together, so let's just multiply the the choices. If a couple of departments look close, we
numbers rather than estimate. can figure out the real numbers then. Health and
Welfare, as we said, was out, because its percent
7 increase was smaller than Transportation's. Does any
7% X 13,000 = 100 X 13,000 = 7 X 130 = 910
other department look like it more than doubled? The
Post Office does, so that's a possibility, but National
Defense definitely didn't, and neither did the Payments
Government Budget to Provinces. Veteran's Affairs looks like it may have
doubled exactly, but we don't need to worry about it
25. 1 .8 billion
since it's not an answer choice. So it's down to Post
We don't really need to get the actual figures for either Office and Transportation. The Post Office started at
fiscal year; all we want is the difference, and we can around 1,000 (since we only care about the ratio of the
estimate that from the graph directly. The difference in bars, we don't need to include the millions) and went up
the height of the two bars for defense spending is a bit to around 3,000. The amount of increase was 3,000-
less than one space; the solid bar goes up to one line, 1,000 or 2,000, and the original whole was 1000, for a
and the shaded bar goes a bit higher than the line . 2000 .
immediately below that. So the difference must be a bit percent increase of or 2000/o. Transportation
1 000
less than 2,000 million dollars or 2 billion, since that's started at around 1,700 or 1,800, and went up to
how much each of those spaces represents. around 5,000. The amount of increase was 3,200 or
3,300. Now we don't care what the actual percent
increase was, only whether it was greater than 2000/o.
And it wasn't; a 200% increase from 1,700 would be
3,400: more than the increase we had here.

l
 Part Three: Question Type Review
332
Chapter 7

28. 8.5 billion Office, Transportation, and Veterans' Affairs, very quickly;
Find the percent increase between the two periods just by looking at the graph, you should see that each
shown, and then apply this percent increase to the department saw an increase of more than 25 percent.
1987-88 level to figure out the 1992-93 level. One That leaves us with Payments to Provinces, and that too,
thing we should keep in mind is that we don't really we can evaluate very quickly, because there the
have to work with percents unless we want to; we can increase was so slight it was obviously less than a 25
keep the numbers as fractions. In 1982-83, the level of percent increase. That last category was the only one
spending was a little more than $4 billion (say 4.25 that did not see an increase in of 25% spending;
billion); it increases to about $6 billion. Then the therefore, the answer is 1 : choice (2).
6 600 .
1987-88 budget was about or times the Americans and their Ages
4_25 425
1982-83 budget. Now we don't need to figure out The information in the graphs is not too tricky; we have
what the percent increase is; we can leave the number two pie charts, and we are given the amounts of each
the way it is. If the percent increase stays constant, then whole under each pie chart. It's important to realize that
so does the ratio between any two consecutive the whole in each case is not the entire population of
budgets. Then in 1992-93, the defense budget will the country, it's only those who are 55 or over. The
600 questions are pretty straightforward too, with the
again be times the previous defense budget, or
425 exception of the last, which may strike some as tricky,
(in billions of dollars), and others as just plain cruel.

600 3600 144 30. 15.4 million

425 x 6 = 425 = 17 Under the 1960 pie chart we're told there were
32, 134,000 Americans fifty-five or older during that
At this point, we should just look at the answer choices. year; the pie chart shows that of these, 48 percent were
This fraction must be less than 10, since 144 is less than between the ages of 55-64 inclusive. That must be just
10 x 17. Let's try 8.5: it's in the middle of the three a little less than one-half of the total figure; 15.4 million
I
choices that are less than 10, so even if we find that it's is the only answer less than one-half of 32 million.

d not right, we'll still know which choice is right. 8.5 x

17=144.5.

29. 1
31. 4
In 1980 there were about 47 million Americans 55 or
older, while in 1960 there were only about 32 million;
What we're looking for, in effect, is which categories these figures are from under the charts. The proportions
show an increase of less than 250/o. We can estimate to of some of the categories decreased from 1960 to
make our work easier. National defense grew from a 1980 (for example, the 55-64 group decreases from
little more than 4 billion to about 6 billion. Well, if it had 48% to 45%), but given that the whole is so much
increased exactly 250/o, then that would mean an bigger in 1980 than in 1960, it's pretty clear that the
increase of about 1 billion. Since it increased number of people must increase in each category, too.
significantly more than that, we know it must have This is the kind of question where you should not do
increased more than 25 percent. Health and Welfare any calculations; since the whole is almost 50 percent
grew from about 13 billion to 18 billion, an increase of more in 1980, we would need a much more dramatic
about 5 billion. Since 5 billion is more than 25 percent decrease in any one category to get a decrease in
of 13 billion, Health and Welfare isn't what we want, number. All four categories increase; the answer is
either. We can dismiss the next three categories, Post choice 5, which is 4.
 Part Three: Question Type Review j
Data Interpretation 333

32. 6.3 million million. What percent of 226 is 167 Well, obviously, it's
The answer choices are close enough that we have to be less than 10%, which would be 22.6 million; and it's
fairly exact in our estimations. The pie chart shows that also greater than 50/o, which would be 11.3 million. So
340/o of all Americans 55 or over fell into the 65 to 74 it's either 70/o, or 90/o. At this point, it's simplest to
age group in 1960, and 14.40/o fell into the 75 to 84 age multiply: 70/o of 226 is om x 226 = 15.82. This is as
group. That means the difference in their number will be close to 16 as we're going to get; choice 2 is the correct
34 percent - 14.4 percent or just under 20 percent of answer.
the total number. Just under 20 percent of 32 million
means just under i of 32 million or a little more than 34. It cannot be determined from the information
given
6 million.
On the one hand, someone who was 55 in 1960
33. 7% would be 75 in 1980; and someone who was 64 in
Find approximately how many Americans were 1960 would be 84 in 1980, so you might think that we
between 65 and 74 (inclusive), then find what percent can just compare the numbers. The problem is that we
this is of the entire population. We know from the pie don't know whether the 75-year-old Americans in 1980
chart that 32 percent or just under a third of all were the same ones who were here in 1960. There's
Americans 55 or older fell into the 65 to 74 age group. the possibility that some people who were here in
The information beneath the graph tells us that 1960 moved to another country, and that those who
47,247,000 Americans were 55 or over; a third of this were here in 1980 came from another country. We
will be a bit less than 16 million. The total population of need some information about that before we can
the United States at this time is given as around 226 answer the question.