Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumResolving Paradoxes and Discrepancies

A metropolitan transit authority introduced micro-transit shuttle vans operating on flexible, demand-responsive routes to serve low-density suburban neighborhoods, hoping to boost overall public transit ridership. During the first year of operation, the shuttle service successfully attracted thousands of suburban residents who previously commuted exclusively by private automobiles. Nevertheless, total public transit ridership across the metropolitan area experienced a measurable decline over the same period.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent paradox described above?

  1. Because the flexible shuttle vans frequently drew vehicles and drivers from established fixed-route suburban bus lines, service frequency on those bus lines dropped significantly, causing a far greater number of regular bus riders to switch to private driving than the number of new commuters gained by the shuttles.Answer
  2. B
    Suburban commuters who switched to the micro-transit shuttle vans reported higher satisfaction levels regarding trip comfort and door-to-door convenience compared to traditional municipal buses.
  3. C
    During the same year, the transit authority lowered fares on municipal bus lines throughout the metropolitan area to encourage broader public transit adoption.
  4. D
    High-density urban centers within the metropolitan area experienced slight population growth due to the construction of several new residential apartment complexes.
  5. E
    Private automobile ownership rates in the suburban neighborhoods served by the shuttle vans remained steady throughout the year.

Answer

The statement explaining that shuttle vans drew drivers and vehicles away from fixed-route bus lines, causing a larger loss of bus riders than the gain in shuttle riders, resolves the paradox.
The correct choice reconciles both premises by identifying a trade-off in resource allocation. While the shuttle service attracted new suburban commuters, pulling vehicles and drivers from established bus lines degraded service quality on those lines. The resulting loss of regular bus riders outweighed the addition of new shuttle riders, explaining how total ridership could fall despite the new service's popularity.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the two contradictory facts in the stimulus.
Fact 1: The new suburban shuttle service successfully attracted thousands of former car drivers to public transit. Fact 2: Total metropolitan public transit ridership decreased overall.
Resolving a paradox requires finding a factor that allows both facts to be true simultaneously without denying either premise.
2
Evaluate the mechanism provided by the correct explanation.
By shifting resources away from existing bus lines to run the new shuttles, service on those bus lines degraded. This caused existing transit users to abandon public transit in numbers exceeding the new riders gained by the shuttle service.
This establishes a cause-and-effect relationship that accounts for both the localized success of the shuttle service and the net overall drop in transit system ridership.

Key Concept

Resolving Paradoxes and Discrepancies
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Resolving Paradoxes and Discrepancies

More questions from this topic