In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at lea

Question

In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at least 5 days of paid sick leave per year to employees, reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice as frequent as they are in states where there is no such mandate.  Since it is very difficult to monitor each case of absenteeism to verify whether it is indeed a true case of illness, no accurate report of true illness-related absenteeism is available. However, this does not warrant the accusations of critics of the laws that in the states with mandated sick leave, at least half of the reported cases of absenteeism due to illness are fake. Clearly,  in states where most companies do not provide sick leave, workers do not have a strong incentive to skip work and prefer report to work while ill rather than go unpaid.

In the table, select the statement that describes the role of the first bold portion and select the statement the describes the role of the second bold portion. Make two selections, one in each column.

Shankey94 · Answer

In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at least 5 days of paid sick leave per year to employees, reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice as frequent as they are in states where there is no such mandate. Since it is very difficult to monitor each case of absenteeism to verify whether it is indeed a true case of illness, no accurate report of true illness-related absenteeism is available. However, this does not warrant the accusations of critics of the laws that in the states with mandated sick leave, at least half of the reported cases of absenteeism due to illness are fake. Clearly, in states where most companies do not provide sick leave, workers do not have a strong incentive to skip work and prefer report to work while ill rather than go unpaid.

In the table, select the statement that describes the role of the first bold portion and select the statement the describes the role of the second bold portion. Make two selections, one in each column.

First Boldface statement:
 It clearly refers to a finding. In the second statement although author raises a doubt on the inference drawn from the finding.

Second Boldface Statement: 
 It clearly is present to undermine a certain implication derived from the first statement.

Hence
1st statement:
 A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.

2nd statement:
 A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.

UtkarshAnand · Answer

BF 1: In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at least 5 days of paid sick leave per year to employees, reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice as frequent as they are in states where there is no such mandate.
Role of BF 1: Provides data/fact/finding.

BF 2: in states where most companies do not provide sick leave, workers do not have a strong incentive to skip work and prefer report to work while ill rather than go unpaid.
Role of BF 2: Provides conclusion through a claim.

The remaining meat of the paragraph talks about the implications ("accusations of critics of the laws that in the states with mandated sick leave, at least half of the reported cases of absenteeism due to illness are fake") of the data provided by BF1.

Now down to options:

Statement 1: A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.
States the role of BF 1. 
Reason: BF 1 presents certain data/facts/finding based on which the portion of the paragraph that follows draws implications. These implications are later disputed by the author who presents his own conclusion through BF 2.

Statement 2: A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument.
States neither the role of BF 1 nor the role of BF 2.
The findings are presented by BF 1. Nowhere in the remaining portion of the passage the accuracy of these findings is talked about. 
 
Statement 3: Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole. 
States neither the role of BF 1 nor the role of BF 2.
BF 1 supplies facts. BF 2 gives conclusion based on the implications of the fact provided by BF 1.

Statement 4: A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.
States the role of BF 2. 
Reason: BF 1 presents certain data/facts/finding based on which the portion of the paragraph that follows draws certain implications ("accusations of critics of the laws that in the states with mandated sick leave, at least half of the reported cases of absenteeism due to illness are fake"). These implications are later disputed by the author who presents his own conclusion through BF 2.

Statement 5: Evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate.
States neither the role of BF 1 nor the role of BF 2.
The findings are presented by BF 1. Nowhere in the remaining portion of the passage the accuracy of these findings is talked about.

Statements 6:A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding.
States neither the role of BF 1 nor the role of BF 2.
BF 1 is a fact so it is out. BF 2 is a claim but the claim has been presented against certain implications ("accusations of critics of the laws that in the states with mandated sick leave, at least half of the reported cases of absenteeism due to illness are fake") derived (from findings provided in BF 1) and not to support these implications.

Kushchokhani · Answer

Finding and evidence are facts that cannot be disputed.
Claim is an opinion that can be disputed.
Using the above understanding,

Role of 1st bold portion- A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.
1st bold portion is a background info/fact that cannot be disputed. Hence, only choices A, B, C and E are contestants.
Of these 4 choices, Choice A best fits here because it is a finding which has two implications- 1 is given by critics and the other by the author- that is being disputed in the argument.
Hence, answer is A.

Role of 2nd bold portion- A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.
This bold faced statement is a conclusion, which can be disputed. Hence, only answer choices D and F are contestants.
The sentence immediately before the 2nd bold portion is an implication derived from a finding and the 2nd bold portion argues against this. 
Hence, answer is D.

MiloMia · Answer

Background: 
In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at least 5 days of paid sick leave per year to employees, reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice as frequent as they are in states where there is no such mandate.

Background:
Since it is very difficult to monitor each case of absenteeism to verify whether it is indeed a true case of illness, no accurate report of true illness-related absenteeism is available.

Conclusion: 
However, this does not warrant the accusations of critics of the laws that in the states with mandated sick leave, at least half of the reported cases of absenteeism due to illness are fake.

Premise: 
Clearly, in states where most companies do not provide sick leave, workers do not have a strong incentive to skip work and prefer report to work while ill rather than go unpaid.

1st: 
A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.

2nd: 
A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.

JDLaw · Answer

First Bold statement is a fact/evidence from which we are deriving an implication. This derived implication is later challenged. Hence, the first statement is option 1  A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.  The argument accuracy is not questioned, so other options are incorrect.
Second Bold statement is a judgement/Claim as it is not a fact/evidence. This claim is used as a challenge to a previously derived implication. Therefore, Ans is option 4 -  A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.

Archit3110 · Answer

In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at least 5 days of paid sick leave per year to employees, reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice as frequent as they are in states where there is no such mandate.

A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument.

in states where most companies do not provide sick leave, workers do not have a strong incentive to skip work and prefer report to work while ill rather than go unpaid.

A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding .

Arm007 · Answer

Solving it like a CR question.
Conclusion: However, this does not warrant the accusations of critics of the laws that in the states with mandated sick leave, at least half of the reported cases of absenteeism due to illness are fake. -> This is what the argument is centered around and this line states the conclusion or intent of author.

Premise1 : In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at least 5 days of paid sick leave per year to employees, reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice as frequent as they are in states where there is no such mandate. Since it is very difficult to monitor each case of absenteeism to verify whether it is indeed a true case of illness, no accurate report of true illness-related absenteeism is available.

Premise2: Clearly, in states where most companies do not provide sick leave, workers do not have a strong incentive to skip work and prefer report to work while ill rather than go unpaid. -> this is not the conclusion, this is a Premise or a claim. This helps us form the conclusion

Now both the bold portion are Premises. Premise 1 introduces a finding which the argument disputes about and Premise 2 supports the conclusion by providing additional insight.

Let's eliminate the options
Role of 1st bold portion:
A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument: We are not talking about the accuracy of this finding rather the author is interested about the reason behind it. Hence it is wrong
A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding: the statement is not a claim, hence this is wrong.
A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding: Similar to above case, Premise 1 is not a claim, hence this is wrong. 
Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole: There is no evidence in Premise 1, hence this is wrong.
Evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate: There is no evidence in Premise 1, hence this is wrong

Hence the role of first bold face is  A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.  This can said because the bold face introduces a finding, which is being disputed by the author and critics.

Bold face 2: 
Let's eliminate the options.

The second bold face is a claim and not a finding, hence option 1,2 are wrong. So "A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument" and "A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument" options can be eliminated
It is also not a evidence, neither does author not show any proof nor does he imply that this statement is a proven fact. Hence option 3, 5 are out. So "Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole" and "Evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate" are incorrect. 
The boldface 2 supports the author claims that the critics are wrong, hence it in a way helps author to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.  Hence option 4 is correct  and option 6 is wrong.

So the second boldface plays the role of  'A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.'

wadhwakaran · Answer

BF1---> Presents a situation i.e. reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice
Since....available ---> Provides a fact that no accurate report of true illness -related absenteeism is available.
However...fake---> Provides opinion of author that critics of law cannot conclude that atleast half of the reported case of absenteeism due to illness are fake.
BF-2---> Acknowledges the fact that in states where no such mandate of sick leaves is there, people have no incentive to report illness and go unpaid.

A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.  BF1 presents a finding and its implications i.e. half the reports are fake in states where law mandates sick leave is not disputed in the argument. Therefore correct.

A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument. BF1 presents a report and accuracy of the report is not being evaluated

Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole.  may not be true for BF2 because BF2 provides a claim i.e. people in states where there is no sick leave have no incentive in providing fake report.

A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.  BF2 presents a claim and the said claim does argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.

Evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate.  BF2 does not present evidence to establish that finding is accurate.

A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding.  BF2 presents a claim but the said claim does not support deriving certain implications from a finding.

rajtare · Answer

In the beginning of the argument an evidence is presented, based on this argument author express her opinion and in the end makes the claim, considering evidence presented in the first bold statement, and additional facts presented in the argument.
 
Role of 1st bold portion: Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole
Role of 2nd bold portion: A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding

yipmewmew · Answer

The 1st BF is definitely a finding that two parties are using to draw different inferences. SO clearly Role of 1st bold portion ans is Option A and the second BF is the author's main conclusion, so it has to be Option D.

av1901 · Answer

Argument synopsis: A finding claims that people take more sick leaves in states where 5 sick leaves are mandated by labor laws as compared to those in states where there are no such mandates. The argument continues by stating that since verifying a sick leave case for its authenticity is difficult which is why data does not exist, but this lack of data does not warrant the criticism that those sick leaves are fake.
The author disagrees with people offering such criticism based on the above finding by stating that in countries where sick leaves are not mandated by labor laws, people even while sick come to work to avoid getting a pay cut

So, from this synopsis, we can safely see that there is a finding, which is used by certain people (critics) to draw out a certain conclusion, which the author totally is against and the author offers a different conclusion based on the finding

Let us now examine the answer choices

A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.

YES! The FIRST BOLD FACE portion is a finding, whose implications are stated as something by certain people/critics, which are then disputed by the author of the argument

A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument.

Although it is a finding, but the accuracy of the finding is never doubted in the argument, its just the implications of the same that are disputed

Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole.

No, none of the portions play the role of an evidence and certainly do not support the argument

A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.

YES! The author in the SECOND BOLD FACE PORTION presents a claim that it is not that the leaves are fake but that people in countries where sick leaves are not a mandate are inclined to work while being sick to avoid pay cut, thus arguing against the implications derived by the critics from the finding presented in the first bold face portion

Evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate.

No, none of the portions play the role of the evidence

A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding.

No, although the second bold face portion is a claim presented, but it is presented to ARGUE AGAINST implications from the finding, not in support of the same

Answer:

First Bold Face: A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.

Second Bold Face: A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.

pintukr · Answer

Bold Face 1 ---> A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument .

Bold Face 2 ---> A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding .

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hello Everyone!

The OA to this question is:

Role of 1st bold portion:  A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.
 Role of 2nd bold portion:  A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.

The same is updated in the question's main thread.

Catman · Answer

Statement 1- In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at least 5 days of paid sick leave per year to employees, reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice as frequent as they are in states where there is no such mandate.

"-Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole."
 
Both statement supports the argument that country not providing sick leaves as per labor laws seeks less absenteeism among employees. This is the evidence which has been presented to support the argument.

Statement 2 - Clearly, in states where most companies do not provide sick leave, workers do not have a strong incentive to skip work and prefer report to work while ill rather than go unpaid.

"A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding."

This is the claim which author present to support the conclusion that companies operating in countries without sick leave labor laws have less absenteeism than other countries.

Posted from my mobile device

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

The first bold portion is given as a fact, so it cannot be answered as  “a claim” . And because the remainder of the passage talks about the causes/effects of that finding, choice A is an appropriate description.

The second boldface portion is, indeed, a claim – it takes the initial finding and infers something about it by noting an incentive inherent in the lack of that labor law. Therefore, choice D is correct.

Answer:  
 Role of 1st bold portion:  A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.
 Role of 2nd bold portion:  A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.

In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at lea

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

Role of 1st bold portion	Role of 2nd bold portion
		A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.
		A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument
		Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole.
		A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.
		Evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate.
		A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding.

Role of 1st bold portion	Role of 2nd bold portion
		A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.
		A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument.
		Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole.
		A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.
		Evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate.
		A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding.

GMAT Two-part Analysis (TPA) Questions

In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at lea

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards