Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
In countries where automobile insurance includes [#permalink]
20 Dec 2010, 02:25
33% (02:30) correct
67% (00:51) wrong based on 13 sessions
In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whiplash injuries sustained in automobile accidents, reports of having suffered such injuries are twice as frequent as they are in countries where whiplash is not covered. Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identifi ed. Nevertheless, these facts do not warrant the conclusion drawn by some commentators that in the countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious. Clearly, in countries where automobile insurance does not include compensation for whiplash, people often have little incentive to report whiplash injuries that they actually have suffered.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
(A) The fi rst is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim. (B) The fi rst is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is that conclusion. (C) The fi rst is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion for which the argument provides further evidence; the second is the main conclusion of the argument. (D) The fi rst is a fi nding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second is a claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from that fi nding. (E) The fi rst is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to establish that the fi nding is accurate.
Re: Found it very defficult - 750 level - wiplash injuries [#permalink]
20 Dec 2010, 14:16
D is the correct answer.
Suppose country X (with compensation) have 100 reported cases
Country Y (without compensation) have 50 reported cases
The first boldface present a finding and it is implying that the extra 50 reported cases in country X is spurious. People are reporting false cases to get the compensation.
The second boldface argue against that implication. Its explaining the reason that country Y has less reported cases is because people in country Y has less incentive (w/o compensation) to report whiplash. Thus, its not questioning the 50 extra reported cases in country X.