Question Description
From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2025 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice From 1994 to 2001, violent crime in New York City steadily decreased by over 50%, from a rate of 1,861 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 1994 down to 851 violent crimes per 100,000 people in 2001. Criminologists have partially attributed this drop to proactive policing tactics such as “broken window po-licing,” wherein city officials immediately fixed small acts of vandalism and, as a result, lowered other types of criminal behavior. During this same period, the rate of violent crime in the United States steadily decreased by 28% (down to 500 violent crimes per 100,000 people).Which of the following conclusions is best supported by the information above?a)The decrease in the total crime rate in the United States caused the decrease in New York City’s crime rate.b)New York City spends more per capita on law enforcement than does the rest of the United States.c)If the rest of the United States were to adopt law enforcement tactics similar to those of New York City, national violent crime rates would continue to fall.d)Between 1994 and 2001, the violent crime rate in New York City was consistently higher than the national average.e)The violent crime rate in New York City will soon be below the national average.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.