Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

It is currently 20 Jul 2019, 17:48

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

During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1082
Reviews Badge
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 06 Jan 2019, 05:45
9
21
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  65% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (02:16) correct 39% (02:21) wrong based on 665 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics


During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims were larger than the company can afford to sustain. Pro-Tect cannot reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, so cannot protect itself against continued large payouts that way. Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices. Many policyholders will respond to the discount by installing antitheft devices, since the amount of the discount will within two years typically more than cover the cost of installation. Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts.

In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


(A) The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second presents the strategy that was adopted instead and whose effectiveness the argument assesses.

(B) The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion; the second is that conclusion.

(C) The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy.

(D) The first provides evidence in favor of adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to pursue an alternative goal.

(E) The first is a consideration offered against adopting a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second is the main conclusion that the argument is seeking to establish.


Same argument but different boldface. https://gmatclub.com/forum/during-the-p ... 50309.html

Originally posted by goalsnr on 26 May 2008, 08:33.
Last edited by Bunuel on 06 Jan 2019, 05:45, edited 7 times in total.
Edited the question.
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
D
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9446
Location: Pune, India
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Nov 2014, 01:11
6
goalsnr wrote:
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims
were larger than the company can afford to sustain. Pro-Tect cannot reduce the
number of car-theft policies it carries
, so cannot protect itself against continued large
payouts that way. Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of
car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices
. Many policyholders will respond
to the discount by installing antitheft devices, since the amount of the discount will
within two years typically more than cover the cost of installation. Thus, because cars
with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual
payouts.
In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second presents the
strategy that was adopted instead and whose effectiveness the argument assesses.
B. The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy
for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy.
D. The first provides evidence in favor of adopting a certain strategy for achieving a
goal; the second reports a decision to pursue an alternative goal.
E. The first is a consideration offered against adopting a certain strategy for
achieving a goal; the second is the main conclusion that the argument is seeking
to establish.


Discuss your approach to solve this CR.


Responding to a pm:

I don't think you have the correct OA here. Could someone please post a screenshot of the actual question and OA.

The goal is: "protecting itself against continued large payouts"
Strategy 1: reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries
Strategy 2: offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices

So (A) fits.

(C) is incorrect.
If statement 1 is viewed as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy, what is this "certain strategy"? This consideration actually supports the "alternative strategy" only.
The "alternative strategy" of course is "offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices".
But (C) talks about two different strategies.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Most Helpful Community Reply
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1560
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 May 2008, 18:31
2
12
zoltan wrote:
I have really trouble with these kind of questions.

How should I attack these kind of questions? Consideration, Judgment, strategy and etc... So difficult to figure the answer out in 2 min.

I get confused! :twisted:



goalsnr wrote:
Gmatnub, Sinha, sondeso...do you guys want to explain your approach too?


You should go dig the forum "New to this forum". I think, this stuff is useful. For example, you know what is "consideration", what is "evidence"....
There are some tips useful too.

For the boldface, the first and the key is "Should find out exactly what is the [main] conclusion"

I go to the New to Verbal Forum, copy and past here!

Principle: something fundamental that we do not question. This would be somewhat stronger than a fact because it is not specific to a limited number of cases but instead, apply to a broader range of scenarios(and often deeper in meaning). For instance, you will not talk about the principle that crime is increasing in large cities. Instead, it is a fact which applies to large cities. However, you will talk about the principles of Physics or the fundamental principles of Human Rights. I believe principles convey a stronger connotation than mere facts.

Fact: something taken as true at face value (stats, historical events)

Evidence: what is used to support a conclusion (examples, stats, historical events). Although these may include facts, it is usually stronger than facts because they are direct elements needed for the conclusion to stand whereas facts are not necessary for the latter to stand

Pre-evidence: This is a bit of a stretch. It will not often be on the test but it seems very similar to "background" information as described below.

Background:
Elements needed to put the evidence into context but which, as stand alone pieces of information, might not constitute what is called an evidence necessary to arrive at a conclusion. For instance, blood tests performed on one thousand persons may reveal that 35% of those persons were HIV infected. However, the background information could be that the test was performed in more underinformed regions of the world where AIDS knowledge is at a minimum. As you can see, the fact that the test was performed in more underinformed regions is not in and of itself an evidence because it does not allow us to come to a conclusion. Instead, the 35% stats, as a stand-alone piece of info, is what will lead us to the conclusion we want. However, the background info is also crucial and cannot be omitted; it is required background info.

Consideration: Something which was taken into account or given some thought before arriving to the conclusion.

Premise: This is usually a required statement to arrive at a conclusion. Evidence and facts want to prove something to you whereas premises are there to logically lead you to a conclusion. The best example of premises is the ones included in syllogisms. For instance, you can say that(premise1) when it rains, you go outside. Then, it rains(premise2). You have to be outside(conclusion).

Assumption: Unstated information which will link the argument to a logical conclusion. Without this, the argument falls apart.

Conclusion: Self-explanatory

Inference: Something that might not be explicitly stated or proved. For instance, you may say that 95% of GMAT test-takers have over 340. We can reasonably infer that Anthony will get more than 340 on his GMAT based on the fact given. I think the main difference b/w an inference and a conclusion is that the former might not be the final line of an argument. For instance, there could be facts/evidence given, an inference in b/w, and then the conclusion. An inference can be an intermediate step before the conclusion which will sum up the whole passage. Also, a conclusion seems to be stronger because it is based on stronger facts/evidence. As in my previous example, we can reasonably infer that Anthony got 340+ on his GMAT but we cannot conclude that he got 340+. See the nuance?
_________________
General Discussion
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 238
Location: Hungary
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 May 2008, 05:31
1
I have really trouble with these kind of questions.

How should I attack these kind of questions? Consideration, Judgment, strategy and etc... So difficult to figure the answer out in 2 min.

I get confused! :twisted:
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1082
Reviews Badge
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 May 2008, 15:45
1
[quote="zoltan"]I have really trouble with these kind of questions.

How should I attack these kind of questions? Consideration, Judgment, strategy and etc... So difficult to figure the answer out in 2 min.

I get confused! :twisted:[/quote

How should I attack these kind of questions? Consideration, Judgment, strategy and etc... So difficult to figure the answer out in 2 min.
Thats teh whole purpose of this thread. For bold face CRs thi sis teh strategy I use:
1. I pick one of the bold statements- Usually the one I understand clearly.
2. I go through the answers choices and eliminate choices which donot adhere to the statement. For example the statement could serve as an evidence, assumption or conclusion in the argument. I use this knowledge as the basis to eliminate answer choices.
3. I repeat step 2 with other statement.

Most of the times this approach works for me.


Gmatnub, Sinha, sondeso...do you guys want to explain your approach too?
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2009
Posts: 721
Location: New Delhi
WE 1: 5.5 yrs in IT
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Jul 2009, 22:54
Tricky question. I would opt A, though some other options also looks quite tempting.

The argument is talking about two strategies to reduce the payout:
1st, by changing the car-theft policies, which is not possible
2nd, by encouraging policyholders to install anti-theft device
Based on this the argument is giving the conclusion to opt for 2nd strategy.

Please note, this is not the main conclusion. Rather the main conclusion is in the last line "Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts."

A. The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second presents the strategy that was adopted instead and whose effectiveness the argument assesses. -Correct
B. The first is a judgment made in support of a certain conclusion; the second is that conclusion. -First is not a judgment to support 2nd, rather both are different strategies.
C. The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy
for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy. -Both are different strategies, without any relation.
D. The first provides evidence in favor of adopting a certain strategy for achieving a
goal; the second reports a decision to pursue an alternative goal. -Both are different strategies, without any relation.
E. The first is a consideration offered against adopting a certain strategy for
achieving a goal; the second is the main conclusion that the argument is seeking
to establish. -2nd is a sub-conclusion, and not the main conclusion. Rather the main conclusion is in the last line.
_________________
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 723
Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Jul 2009, 23:13
Pro-Tect cannot reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, so cannot protect itself against continued large
payouts that way.

Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of
car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices
.

A. The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second presents the
strategy that was adopted instead and whose effectiveness the argument assesses.

C. The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy
for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy.

Between A and C. I would go for C.
If Blue+Red was boldfaced, I would have chosen A. Because, then it 'rules out' the strategy.

Since it is not the case, first one is only a consideration.
OA pls.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Jul 2009
Posts: 29
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jul 2009, 13:26
1
Economist wrote:
Pro-Tect cannot reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, so cannot protect itself against continued large
payouts that way.

Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of
car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices
.

A. The first rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal; the second presents the
strategy that was adopted instead and whose effectiveness the argument assesses.

C. The first has been used as a consideration to support adopting a certain strategy
for achieving a goal; the second reports a decision to adopt an alternative strategy.

Between A and C. I would go for C.
If Blue+Red was boldfaced, I would have chosen A. Because, then it 'rules out' the strategy.

Since it is not the case, first one is only a consideration.
OA pls.


Brand new here (this forum and the accompnaying community are great BTW) but thought I would chime in. C is wrong because of two words:

1.) "support" - If the "certain strategy" is to reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, the first is then a consideration against adopting that strategy, not in support of it.

2.) "alternative" - Alternatively (no pun intended), if you interpret the first as a consideration in "support" of the "certain strategy" of offering discounts for customers who install anti-theft devices (which, at least to me, seems plausible), then the decision would not be for an alternative strategy.

Hope the questions keep coming - this is great practice.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 30 Jul 2014
Posts: 121
GPA: 3.72
Reviews Badge
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Dec 2015, 07:00
During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on car-theft claims were larger than the company can afford to sustain.
(An observation or phenomenon)

Pro-Tect cannot reduce the number of car-theft policies it carries, so cannot protect itself against continued large payouts that way.
(a constraint or ruling out a non-pragmatic option)

Therefore, Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices.
(a stretegy that PT has decided to adopt -> supporting the main conclusion)

Many policyholders will respond to the discount by installing antitheft devices, since the amount of the discount will within two years typically more than cover the cost of installation. ( a prediction that, if true, will support the conclusion . The dependent clause is the justification for the success possibilities of the main conclusion )

Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts.(main conclusion of the argument)

A) Matches the analysis
B) First is not a judgement and second is not a conclusion.
C) First part is correct; second is incorrect as no alternate strategy has been discussed.
D) First part is correct; second is incorrect as argument doesn't discuss "alternate goal".
E) First is a consideration not against any strategy; second is not a conclusion.

Hence A is the correct one.
_________________
A lot needs to be learned from all of you.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 13 Sep 2015
Posts: 17
Location: India
Schools: IIMA (I)
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.2
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 May 2016, 18:40
the second statement says that a co. has decided to do the mentioned step ...thus C clearly mentions this part. while A says taht decision has already been adopted and its effectiveness is being analyzed....a minor but substantial difference between A and C
While the first part of options A and C define the first bold part clearly.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
D
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9446
Location: Pune, India
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 May 2016, 20:31
1
vishnu440 wrote:
the second statement says that a co. has decided to do the mentioned step ...thus C clearly mentions this part. while A says taht decision has already been adopted and its effectiveness is being analyzed....a minor but substantial difference between A and C
While the first part of options A and C define the first bold part clearly.


(C) is wrong.

There are two strategies discussed:
Reduce policies
Offer discount

Note that (C) uses "first supports CERTAIN STRATEGY"
Which is this strategy? It supports "offers discount" because it says reducing policies is not possible.

(C) also says "second adopts an alternative strategy"
Now which strategy is this? Second adopts "offers discount" only. It does not adopt an alternative strategy. It adopts the same strategy that first supports.

(A) is correct. Look here: during-the-past-year-pro-tect-insurance-company-s-total-64492.html#p1441546
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 11 Nov 2013
Posts: 4
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2016, 06:39
I think, A cannot be the right answer for the fact that the Insurance Company has only decided to offer a discount, not yet offered a discount. Option A rather says the company already adopted the strategy; A is certainly wrong! :)
Retired Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2870
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Sep 2016, 08:12
mdmurad wrote:
I think, A cannot be the right answer for the fact that the Insurance Company has only decided to offer a discount, not yet offered a discount. Option A rather says the company already adopted the strategy; A is certainly wrong! :)


Deciding a strategy can be considered equivalent to adopting it - what you mean is probably implementation. Option A does not mention that the strategy was implemented, only that it was adopted, and how effective the adoption will be is what the passage assesses. option A is alright.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2676
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Mar 2017, 10:18
1
Top Contributor
Hm, it seems that the GMAT is obsessed with the Pro-Tect Insurance Company: https://gmatclub.com/forum/pro-tect-ins ... 59429.html. Very similar passage, different question format.

This is a tough question, but I'm wondering where the discrepancies in the OA are coming from. Maybe the GMATPrep software is saying one thing, but a Word or pdf file that's floating around on the internet is saying another? I'm not sure.

In any case... what's going on in this passage, and how can we distinguish between A and C? Well, I always like to start these boldfaced questions by making sense of the structure of the passage. In this case, there's a clear conclusion in the passage, for whatever that's worth:

Quote:
Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts.


The conclusion references Pro-Tect's plan. Great. So what, exactly, is Pro-Tect's plan?

Quote:
Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices


Hm, and that plan happens to be the second boldfaced statement. Cool, now we can compare the second half of (A) and (C). (A) is clear as a bell -- that second boldfaced statement is clearly "the strategy that was adopted" and, based on our glimpse of the conclusion, it is also the strategy "whose effectiveness the argument assesses." (C) isn't terrible, but I'd argue that if we think about the purpose of the passage, the second boldfaced statement is clearly the main strategy being assessed -- not really an "alternative strategy," as (C) suggests.

And what about the first boldfaced statement? Again, (A) is clear as a bell: the statement clearly "rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal." (C) again isn't completely awful, but it's far less connected to the main point of the passage: it's hard to argue that (C) is a "consideration to support adopting a certain strategy," because it doesn't seem to support anything in particular -- it just rules out a different strategy.
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

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; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | 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?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |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 | Time management on verbal
SVP
SVP
User avatar
V
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 2284
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Mar 2017, 01:14
GMATNinja wrote:
Hm, it seems that the GMAT is obsessed with the Pro-Tect Insurance Company: https://gmatclub.com/forum/pro-tect-ins ... 59429.html. Very similar passage, different question format.

This is a tough question, but I'm wondering where the discrepancies in the OA are coming from. Maybe the GMATPrep software is saying one thing, but a Word or pdf file that's floating around on the internet is saying another? I'm not sure.

In any case... what's going on in this passage, and how can we distinguish between A and C? Well, I always like to start these boldfaced questions by making sense of the structure of the passage. In this case, there's a clear conclusion in the passage, for whatever that's worth:

Quote:
Thus, because cars with antitheft devices are rarely stolen, Pro-Tect’s plan is likely to reduce its annual payouts.


The conclusion references Pro-Tect's plan. Great. So what, exactly, is Pro-Tect's plan?

Quote:
Pro-Tect has decided to offer a discount to holders of car-theft policies whose cars have antitheft devices


Hm, and that plan happens to be the second boldfaced statement. Cool, now we can compare the second half of (A) and (C). (A) is clear as a bell -- that second boldfaced statement is clearly "the strategy that was adopted" and, based on our glimpse of the conclusion, it is also the strategy "whose effectiveness the argument assesses." (C) isn't terrible, but I'd argue that if we think about the purpose of the passage, the second boldfaced statement is clearly the main strategy being assessed -- not really an "alternative strategy," as (C) suggests.

And what about the first boldfaced statement? Again, (A) is clear as a bell: the statement clearly "rules out a certain strategy for achieving a goal." (C) again isn't completely awful, but it's far less connected to the main point of the passage: it's hard to argue that (C) is a "consideration to support adopting a certain strategy," because it doesn't seem to support anything in particular -- it just rules out a different strategy.


Dear Charles,

In BF question, there is always terms such as consideration, judgment, evidence...etc. Where is the best source to describe each term and its location (premise or conclusion) inside argument? or what is your best advice to learn those terms?

Thanks
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2676
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Mar 2017, 09:20
Top Contributor
That's a huge question, Mo2men! We'll say a lot more about those sorts of issues in the next few weeks and months.

The short answer is that I've never been convinced that it's all that important to learn a whole ton of terminology for GMAT CR. Sure, you should definitely be able to very precisely identify a conclusion when you read the passage, but I don't think that labeling the rest of the passage with words like "premise" or "consideration" or "judgment" or "intermediary conclusion" is necessarily helpful if you're just trying to understand a nice, normal passage (weaken, strengthen, paradox, assumption, etc.).

And sure, those terms appear in the boldfaced CR questions, but they don't necessarily have super-technical definitions that you need to memorize. In this particular example, "judgment," "evidence," and "strategy" are everyday words with fairly standard definitions. "Consideration" isn't necessarily a word we use all the time, but it doesn't have any special definition here, either: it's just a thought or fact or idea that you're using to make form sort of decision. Nothing too technical.

Of course, everybody learns differently, and for a lot of GMAT test-takers, it's super-helpful to dive into this sort of terminology (conclusion, premise, evidence, etc.). I meet quite a few people who find the breakdowns in PowerScore or e-GMAT or MGMAT useful; I probably meet far more people who don't find the terminology useful at all, but again, everybody is different.

Bottom line: if you want to take a shot at one of those resources, go for it! Again, tons of people find them helpful. But for a really large number of successful GMAT test-takers, the terminology itself isn't worth studying. You just have to get really, really good at comprehending passages, understanding how the argument is structured, and picking up on the nuances of language in the question.

I hope this helps! And again, we'll have a lot more to say about this in upcoming posts. :)
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

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; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | 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?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |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 | Time management on verbal
SVP
SVP
User avatar
V
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 2284
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Mar 2017, 09:40
GMATNinja wrote:
That's a huge question, Mo2men! We'll say a lot more about those sorts of issues in the next few weeks and months.

The short answer is that I've never been convinced that it's all that important to learn a whole ton of terminology for GMAT CR. Sure, you should definitely be able to very precisely identify a conclusion when you read the passage, but I don't think that labeling the rest of the passage with words like "premise" or "consideration" or "judgment" or "intermediary conclusion" is necessarily helpful if you're just trying to understand a nice, normal passage (weaken, strengthen, paradox, assumption, etc.).

And sure, those terms appear in the boldfaced CR questions, but they don't necessarily have super-technical definitions that you need to memorize. In this particular example, "judgment," "evidence," and "strategy" are everyday words with fairly standard definitions. "Consideration" isn't necessarily a word we use all the time, but it doesn't have any special definition here, either: it's just a thought or fact or idea that you're using to make form sort of decision. Nothing too technical.

Of course, everybody learns differently, and for a lot of GMAT test-takers, it's super-helpful to dive into this sort of terminology (conclusion, premise, evidence, etc.). I meet quite a few people who find the breakdowns in PowerScore or e-GMAT or MGMAT useful; I probably meet far more people who don't find the terminology useful at all, but again, everybody is different.

Bottom line: if you want to take a shot at one of those resources, go for it! Again, tons of people find them helpful. But for a really large number of successful GMAT test-takers, the terminology itself isn't worth studying. You just have to get really, really good at comprehending passages, understanding how the argument is structured, and picking up on the nuances of language in the question.

I hope this helps! And again, we'll have a lot more to say about this in upcoming posts. :)


Thanks lot for your enlightening response.

Actually, I agree with you. Through my GMAT study, I realized that verbal is far from being math an d formulas, although I'm en engineer and love them :) . However, I want to learn them for only simple reason: only getting myself familiar with BF question terminologies without burning OG questions. I hat to memorize them as it is also waste of time inside the exam to memorize every term. In you opinion, would this be effective?

Thanks in advance for your help
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2676
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Mar 2017, 07:38
Top Contributor
Ooh, good question. One of the problems with the boldfaced questions is that we really don't have all that many official ones in the practice materials -- what, maybe a total of four or five in the OGs, plus a few more in the GMATPrep Question Pack? I haven't counted, but it's somewhere in that ballpark -- and that's not much. So I completely understand why you'd want to make the most of them, and maybe save them for a later stage of your studies.

Again, I'm not convinced that the terminology used in the boldfaced questions is all that technical, so I'm not sure that there's much that's worth memorizing. It's just that you don't want them to look totally unfamiliar, I guess. So you could spend some time in some of the books I mentioned above, and see if that helps. Or you can just deal with them when the time comes -- in theory, the terms are generally going to be things that you understand without any extra studying, it's just that they might feel a little foreign.

And here's the other option: try practicing with some official LSATs. They can be brutally difficult at times, but depending on your score goals, that might be a good thing for you. And something like 20-30% of the questions at least dabble in some "legalese" terminology that will feel a little bit like the boldfaced questions.

If you can kick butt on the LSAT CR (called "logical reasoning" on the LSAT) and RC, then the GMAT stuff will start to feel easier. And it should help a whole lot with the boldfaced questions -- we give most of our students an aggressive diet of LSAT practice, and very few end up having any troubles on the boldfaced CR when they get there.
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

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; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | 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?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |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 | Time management on verbal
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 4816
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Jan 2019, 05:46
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca   [#permalink] 06 Jan 2019, 05:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by

During the past year, Pro-Tect Insurance Company’s total payouts on ca

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





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