It is currently 22 Sep 2017, 03:11

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 43

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 3

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Nonprofit
Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 00:54
6
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

43% (01:43) correct 57% (01:47) wrong based on 620 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized knowledge and access to internal financial records, we can presume that the embezzler worked for XYZ Corp as either an accountant or an actuary. But an accountant would probably not make the kind of mistakes in ledger entries that led to the discovery of the embezzlement. Thus it is likely the the embezzler is one of the actuaries.

Each of the following weakens the the detective's argument EXCEPT:

A. The actuaries' activities while working for XYZ corp were more closely scrutinized by supervisors than were the activities of accountants.
B. There is evidence of breaches in computer security at the time of embezzlement that could have given persons outside XYZ access to internal financial record.
C. XYZ employs 8 accountants whereas it has only 2 actuaries on it's staff.
D. An independent report released before the crime took place concluded that XYZ was vulnerable to embezzlement.
E. Certain security measures at XYZ made it more difficult for the actuaries to have access to internal financial records than for the accountants
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 3

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Posts: 123

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 12

Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Operations
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V31
GMAT 2: 690 Q47 V38
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V39
WE: Design (Manufacturing)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 01:42
D
the option does not have any effect on the conclusion ie . It neither supports nor weakens the conclusion.

Hope that helps!!!:D

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

Work with hope in Heart and dreams in the eyes .... And leave the mind for GMAT problems ;)

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 12

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 43

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 3

Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Nonprofit
Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 01:54
What about B that also effects neither the actuaries nor the accountants so isn't it a bit similar to D in reasoning?

Kudos [?]: 52 [0], given: 3

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 150

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 11

Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 02:06
vasureddy18 wrote:
D
the option does not have any effect on the conclusion ie . It neither supports nor weakens the conclusion.

Hope that helps!!!:D

Posted from my mobile device


which is not weakening = has no effect? can't it be supporting?

Kudos [?]: 104 [0], given: 11

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2010
Posts: 329

Kudos [?]: 258 [0], given: 33

Location: India
Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 04:39
IMO it should be C. the number of accountants or actuaries has no impact on the case. An independent assessment says vulnerable to embezzlement could also mean from external sources. what say guys why do you think C is wrong?

Kudos [?]: 258 [0], given: 33

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2010
Posts: 329

Kudos [?]: 258 [0], given: 33

Location: India
Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 04:43
ok my analysis of the arg is :
Conclusion: actuaries did the embezzlement and not accountants. premise ledger entries were flawed.
A: actuaries scrutinized more so means it was difficult for them to embezzle. Weakens
B: says the breach was external means actuaries are not responsible. weakens
C: IMO right answer
D: independent assessment says system vulnerable - (may be external threats )
E: it was not possible for actuaries to access data - weakens

Kudos [?]: 258 [0], given: 33

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Affiliations: UWC
Joined: 09 May 2012
Posts: 395

Kudos [?]: 1549 [0], given: 100

Location: Canada
GMAT 1: 620 Q42 V33
GMAT 2: 680 Q44 V38
GPA: 3.43
WE: Engineering (Entertainment and Sports)
Reviews Badge
Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 04:58
I chose C and got it wrong but now when I think about it perhaps C does weaken the argument a 'little'.
The argument states that it is likely that the culprit is an actuary. However if all else is equal, statement C tells us that the likelihood of the culprit being an accountant is higher because there are more of them.
Basically, C weakens the argument by bringing in a new idea, not by attacking the authors assumptions.

Kudos [?]: 1549 [0], given: 100

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2010
Posts: 329

Kudos [?]: 258 [1], given: 33

Location: India
Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 20:07
1
This post received
KUDOS
I think this question stem is not up to GMAT standards. I mean for both options C&D. We are assuming things not mentioned in the answer options.

Kudos [?]: 258 [1], given: 33

2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 193

Kudos [?]: 62 [2], given: 22

Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 22:23
2
This post received
KUDOS
A. Weakens the arguement
B. Accountants are considered insiders who have access to financial records whereas Actuaries are considered outsiders - weakens the arguement
C.8 accountants, 2 actuaries - Numbers dont necessarily mean that 2 Actuaries cannot commit the crime. - Doubtful option
D. Neutral stand - Does not qualify to have a positive or negative stand
E. Weakens the arguement.

Can be between C and D.

Kudos [?]: 62 [2], given: 22

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1655

Kudos [?]: 1090 [0], given: 109

Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: Actuaries vs. Accountants: CR [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2012, 22:42
+1 D

Choice D doesn't provide information about who would be more likely of being guilty.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1090 [0], given: 109

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 265

Kudos [?]: 76 [0], given: 6

Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jul 2012, 19:33
+1 D.

That option supports neither accountants nor actuaries.

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.
_________________

+1 Kudos me - I'm half Irish, half Prussian.

Kudos [?]: 76 [0], given: 6

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 900

Kudos [?]: 857 [0], given: 322

Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Premium Member
Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Feb 2013, 22:43
Just want to clear some air regarding the option (C).

Conclusion mentions "likely" ,which means probability.Therefore, if the number of actuary is less than the number of accountants then actuary is less likely the culprit.


Well that will help surely
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Kudos [?]: 857 [0], given: 322

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Aug 2010
Posts: 40

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 3

Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Oct 2014, 09:42
TGC wrote:
Just want to clear some air regarding the option (C).

Conclusion mentions "likely" ,which means probability.Therefore, if the number of actuary is less than the number of accountants then actuary is less likely the culprit.


Well that will help surely

a good perspective.

however, I guess a smaller probability does not mean zero probability, that said, it also will happen.

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 3

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 49

Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 May 2015, 06:46
rakp wrote:
Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized knowledge and access to internal financial records, we can presume that the embezzler worked for XYZ Corp as either an accountant or an actuary. But an accountant would probably not make the kind of mistakes in ledger entries that led to the discovery of the embezzlement. Thus it is likely the the embezzler is one of the actuaries.

Each of the following weakens the the detective's argument EXCEPT:

A. The actuaries' activities while working for XYZ corp were more closely scrutinized by supervisors than were the activities of accountants.
B. There is evidence of breaches in computer security at the time of embezzlement that could have given persons outside XYZ access to internal financial record.
C. XYZ employs 8 accountants whereas it has only 2 actuaries on it's staff.
D. An independent report released before the crime took place concluded that XYZ was vulnerable to embezzlement.
E. Certain security measures at XYZ made it more difficult for the actuaries to have access to internal financial records than for the accountants


D- no effect.
Earlier I thought Oa to be C but C eliminates are no other groups are present.Thus,ACTUARIES ARE RESPONSIBLE.

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 49

CEO
CEO
User avatar
G
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2589

Kudos [?]: 379 [0], given: 177

Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Stanford '20
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Dec 2016, 14:25
C clearly doesn't weaken the argument.
D says that it is possible for an external breaching...
since the source of this question is doubtful...i would suggest ignoring this question.

Kudos [?]: 379 [0], given: 177

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 31 Oct 2016
Posts: 8

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

CAT Tests
Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Dec 2016, 22:53
Experts please give the correct option C or D

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Status: The best is yet to come.....
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 414

Kudos [?]: 142 [1], given: 173

GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Aug 2017, 02:16
1
This post received
KUDOS
Conclusion: One of the actuaries is embezzler.
To weaken we need to show that actuaries are not embezzler.

This is an EXCEPTION question. So, we need to find out one option, which does not weaken the conclusion.

A. The actuaries' activities while working for XYZ corp were more closely scrutinized by supervisors than were the activities of accountants. So, p(actuaries)<p(accountants). Therefore, actuaries may not be embezzler
B. There is evidence of breaches in computer security at the time of embezzlement that could have given persons outside XYZ access to internal financial record. Third party may embezzle. So, actuaries may no be embezzler
C. XYZ employs 8 accountants whereas it has only 2 actuaries on it's staff. So, p(actuaries)<p(accountants). Therefore, same as A.
D. An independent report released before the crime took place concluded that XYZ was vulnerable to embezzlement. Nothing is said about the probability of individual profession. It does not say whether actuaries are embezzler. So, no impact on the conclusion. Correct answer.
E. Certain security measures at XYZ made it more difficult for the actuaries to have access to internal financial records than for the accountants. So, p(actuaries)<p(accountants) and same as A
_________________

Hasan Mahmud

Kudos [?]: 142 [1], given: 173

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 30 May 2017
Posts: 6

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 16

Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2017, 06:06
I chose C and rejected D because I thought if its vulnerable to embezzlement thn some outsider might have done that. Please explain why my reasoning is wrong

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 16

Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 15 Jun 2016
Posts: 86

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 2

CAT Tests
Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2017, 00:14
Hello expert,

please explain why answer is option d?

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 2

Expert Post
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
G
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 952

Kudos [?]: 1357 [0], given: 372

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: 340 Q170 V170
Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2017, 08:43
aksh5900 wrote:
I chose C and rejected D because I thought if its vulnerable to embezzlement thn some outsider might have done that. Please explain why my reasoning is wrong

Quote:
D. An independent report released before the crime took place concluded that XYZ was vulnerable to embezzlement.

Choice (D) only says that XYZ is vulnerable to embezzlement and does not suggest whether this embezzlement would come from the outside or from the inside. For example, XYZ could still be considered vulnerable to embezzlement even if that embezzlement is only likely to come from the inside. Thus, Choice (D) does not weaken the argument on its own.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor at www.gmatninja.com | GMAT blog |food blog | Friendly warning: I'm really bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | 7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99... in any section order

YouTube verbal webinars:
"Next-level" GMAT pronouns | Uses of "that" on the GMAT

Kudos [?]: 1357 [0], given: 372

Re: Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized   [#permalink] 10 Sep 2017, 08:43
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
5 People who have specialized knowledge about a scientific or technical AR15J 3 22 Apr 2017, 01:34
3 because plants have more nutrients earnit 2 06 Nov 2016, 07:11
15 Using new detection techniques, researchers have found trace amounts o monikaleoster 10 24 Apr 2016, 13:13
Because people are generally better at detecting mistakes in bidmanager 3 15 Oct 2013, 07:52
Criminals often have an unusual self-image. Embezzlers often think of vikasp99 2 03 Apr 2017, 11:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Detective: Because the embezzler must have had specialized

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.