It is currently 17 Oct 2017, 01:09

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# In countries where automobile insurance includes

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
Director
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 548

Kudos [?]: 536 [0], given: 2

In countries where automobile insurance includes [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 May 2008, 07:29
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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.
Some
commentators have argued, correctly, that since there is presently no objective test for
whiplash, spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. These
commentators are, however, wrong to draw the further conclusion 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 first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is
an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the judgment reached by the
argument on the accuracy of that finding.
B. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is
evidence that has been used to challenge the accuracy of that finding.
C. The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second
is an intermediate conclusion that has been used to support a conclusion that the
argument criticizes.
D. The first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a narrower claim that
the argument accepts.
E. The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument
accepts; the second is that conclusion.

Kudos [?]: 536 [0], given: 2

Manager
Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 215

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

Re: CR - insurance (boldface) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 May 2008, 08:44
C

The first is factual evidence that is not disputed. The implications of the factual evidence are...

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

SVP
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 1546

Kudos [?]: 177 [0], given: 2

Re: CR - insurance (boldface) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 May 2008, 19:01
C for me as well. I ruled out A and B immediately as the first part is not something that is being evaulated; it is stated as a fact.

Kudos [?]: 177 [0], given: 2

SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1886

Kudos [?]: 1395 [0], given: 1

Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Re: CR - insurance (boldface) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 May 2008, 19:16
C too,

saravalli wrote:
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

This is a finding given to discuss, or at issue of the argument

saravalli wrote:
These
commentators are, however, wrong to draw the further conclusion that in the countries
with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious

"WRONG TO DRAW FURTHER CONCLUSION THAT...." make it a MAIN CONCLUSION that is criticized later by couter-evidence: "CLEARLY,..."

saravalli wrote:
Some
commentators have argued, correctly, that since there is presently no objective test for
whiplash, spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified

This conclusion has no choice that it must be intermidiate conclusion that support to the Main conclusion above that is latter criticized by the author.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 1395 [0], given: 1

Director
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Posts: 548

Kudos [?]: 536 [0], given: 2

Re: CR - insurance (boldface) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 May 2008, 07:21
OA C. Thanks

Kudos [?]: 536 [0], given: 2

Re: CR - insurance (boldface)   [#permalink] 14 May 2008, 07:21
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# In countries where automobile insurance includes

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

 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®.