It is currently 18 Oct 2017, 06:28

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

In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip

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

Hide Tags

Expert Post
Optimus Prep Instructor
User avatar
B
Joined: 06 Nov 2014
Posts: 1905

Kudos [?]: 522 [0], given: 23

Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2015, 10:55
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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 identified. 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?
Since the first boldfaced portion is not a claim, eliminate A and B. The argument is against the conclusion that the reports are all spurious.
(A) The first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is that conclusion.
(C) The first 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. The argument doesn't provide further evidence. Rather, it contradicts it.
(D) The first is a finding (There are more whiplash reports in countries where whiplash is covered.) whose implications (Many people may provide spurious reports.)are at issue in the argument; the second is a claim (Maybe the incidence of whiplash is the same but people have less incentive to report it where it isn't covered.) presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from that finding.
(E) The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate. The second is more of a claim than evidence.
_________________

Janielle Williams

Customer Support

Special Offer: $80-100/hr. Online Private Tutoring
GMAT On Demand Course $299
Free Online Trial Hour

Kudos [?]: 522 [0], given: 23

1 KUDOS received
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 03 Feb 2013
Posts: 942

Kudos [?]: 1055 [1], given: 548

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.88
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Reviews Badge
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jun 2015, 21:49
1
This post received
KUDOS
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 identified. 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.

Lets understand the different parts of the argument
1) 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 fact as this can be verified.

2) Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified ->
This is a claim based on the reasoning provided

3) 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.
This is main conclusion of the argument

4) 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.
This is the supporting argument which supports the argument


In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
1st BF is a observation and it is not a claim.
2nd BF is not the conclusion but a support for a conclusion


(B) The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is that conclusion.
1st BF is a observation and it is not a claim.
2nd BF is not the conclusion but a support for a conclusion



(C) The first 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.
1st BF is the observation and whole argument is trying to evaluate that observation
2nd BF is not the conclusion but a support of the conclusion


(D) The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second is a claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from that finding.
Correct as 1st BF is a finding which is is evaluated in the argument which is same as saying whose implications are at issue in the argument
and as 2nd BF is supporting the argument by refuting the previous conclusion - "these facts do not warrant the conclusion"

(E) The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate.
1st BF is not a finding whose accuracy is evaluated. The observation is taken as true but the conclusion is evaluated in the argument
2nd BF is not supporting the 1st BF finding. It is supporting the conclusion that "these facts do not warrant the conclusion drawn ...blah blah"
_________________

Thanks,
Kinjal
My Debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267.html#p1449379
My Application Experience : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267-40.html#p1516961
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/kinjal-das/

Please click on Kudos, if you think the post is helpful

Kudos [?]: 1055 [1], given: 548

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Apr 2015
Posts: 180

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 185

Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jul 2015, 03:46
Honest question:

What is the difference between A and E? I narrowed it down between those two but were not able to decide...

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 185

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7674

Kudos [?]: 17347 [1], given: 232

Location: Pune, India
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Aug 2015, 23:57
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
getmba 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. Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. 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 first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is that conclusion.
(C) The first 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 first 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 finding.
(E) The first is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate

OA and OE will follow later.


Responding to a pm:

The answer is (D) and not just by using POE but it makes perfect sense (also, it is an official question and the answers in those are not debatable)

Let's write the argument in our own words:

Some countries do not have compensation for whiplash injuries. There, say x whiplash injuries are reported every year.
Other countries have compensation for whiplash injuries. There, 2x whiplash injuries are reported every year.
Now, don't jump to the conclusion that half the reported cases (the extra x) in these countries are spurious - they are there just to get compensation.
Consider that people will report whiplash only if there is a reason to report it.

The bold parts are red and blue. What roles do they play?

The red part gives us some data/finding.
Then the green part points out an implication that people derive from that data and that people should not derive it.
The blue part points out why the implication derived may not be warranted.

Option (D) says exactly this.
(D) The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument;
the second is a claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from that finding.

Do let me know if something is still unclear.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17347 [1], given: 232

2 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2015
Posts: 15

Kudos [?]: 5 [2], given: 10

Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Technology
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V34
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V38
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Sep 2015, 03:16
2
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Premise 1: In countries where insurance cover whiplash injuries, reports of such injuries are twice as frequent.
Premise 2: There is presently no objective test for whiplash. -> This is evidence, so right now we could narrow it to A) or B).

Commentators Conclusion 1: Spurious reports of whiplash cannot be readily identified. -> The author of the passage agrees with this conclusion.
Commentators Conclusion 2: In countries with higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of them are spurious. -> The author of the passage does not agree with this conclusion.

So, the evidence stated in Premise 2 is used by the commentators to support both conclusions and the author of the passage agrees with the first one but disagrees with the second one.
Therefore, the evidence is used to support a conclusion that the argument criticizes, and that conclusion is the second conclusion of the commentators.

Note here that neither the conclusion of the author of the passage nor the evidence stated in Premise 1 is relevant.

Kudos [?]: 5 [2], given: 10

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Feb 2012
Posts: 9

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 164

GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Oct 2015, 03:15
I'm trying to put these answer choices in layman's terms for better understanding. Please help comment on it. Thanks!

C. The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is the position that the argument defends
- a conclusion that the argument accepts: means a conclusion that nowhere in the argument the author refutes it.
- the position that the argument defends: means the main conclusion of the argument

D. The first is an intermediate conclusion that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument defends; the second is the position that the argument opposes
- a conclusion that the argument defends: means a conclusion that the argument accepts, not necessarily the main conclusion

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 164

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 3

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

Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Statistics, Technology
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V28
GPA: 3.15
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Oct 2015, 21:48
punta wrote:
I'm trying to put these answer choices in layman's terms for better understanding. Please help comment on it. Thanks!

C. The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is the position that the argument defends
- a conclusion that the argument accepts: means a conclusion that nowhere in the argument the author refutes it.
- the position that the argument defends: means the main conclusion of the argument

D. The first is an intermediate conclusion that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument defends; the second is the position that the argument opposes
- a conclusion that the argument defends: means a conclusion that the argument accepts, not necessarily the main conclusion


I agree with the explanation on C. Therefore, as I think the author does not reject the conclusion drawn from the 1st boldface, I chose C.

About D., the conclusion that the argument defends = supports = concludes, opposes = against. Of course the 2nd boldface is the main conclusion. Therefore, D can't be the answer

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 30 Jul 2014
Posts: 137

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 98

GPA: 3.72
Reviews Badge
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Dec 2015, 03:08
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
russ9 wrote:
What would you guys say the conclusion is here? I'm torn between two:

"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."

or.

"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."


The first sentence is the conclusion. I read it somewhere that in case of any such confusion try "therefore" test.
That is
statement 1-> therefore statement2
or
statement 2-> therefore statement1
whatever seems logical after "therefore" should be the conclusion.
in this case -
A) people have little incentive to to report -> therefore -> these facts do not warrent the conclusion drawn by some...???
B) these facts do not warrent the conclusion drawn by some...->therefore -> people have little incentive to to report ???

Clearly A wins - hence
the conclusion is
"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."
_________________

A lot needs to be learned from all of you.

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 98

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 30 Jul 2014
Posts: 137

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 98

GPA: 3.72
Reviews Badge
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Dec 2015, 03:17
BrainLab wrote:
Hi, my choice was also D. But can some one explain it with a methodical approach. Which part is here a conclusion etc.
Below you can find my solution, please comment if there are some mistakes in the logic.

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.
--> is a fact

Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. --> Author's opinion

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. --> Conclusion

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.
--> Premise: supports the conclusion drawn by the author, which argue against deriving certain implications from the finding (Fact)


Conclusion is fine; I have mentioned above the method to identify it.
However, I don't agree with whatever you have quoted as author's opinion -

Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. --> Author's opinion

These are findings or observation not merely an opinion.
_________________

A lot needs to be learned from all of you.

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 98

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Apr 2015
Posts: 14

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

Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jan 2016, 02:26
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi all i have a question, in the correct choice D) says "The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument;" but rather than the bold face expression it more looks like the implication of line right after the first bold face that is"Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists" , which drove me to the incorrect selection, can anyone please explain what i am doing wrong here. Thanks

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

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 25 Sep 2015
Posts: 145

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 74

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q48 V37
GPA: 3.26
Reviews Badge
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jan 2016, 22:11
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
getmba 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. Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. 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 first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is that conclusion.
(C) The first 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 first 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 finding.
(E) The first is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate

OA and OE will follow later.


mikemcgarry VeritasPrepKarishma

Is there any resource which can go through the set of indicators that helps in difficult boldface CR questions?

Thanks in advance.

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 74

Expert Post
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7674

Kudos [?]: 17347 [0], given: 232

Location: Pune, India
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jan 2016, 22:21
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
rachitshah wrote:
getmba 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. Presently, no objective test for whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified. 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 first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is that conclusion.
(C) The first 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 first 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 finding.
(E) The first is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate

OA and OE will follow later.


mikemcgarry VeritasPrepKarishma

Is there any resource which can go through the set of indicators that helps in difficult boldface CR questions?

Thanks in advance.


Here are three posts on boldface questions:

http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2014/01 ... questions/
http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2015/05 ... questions/
http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2013/03 ... -the-gmat/
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17347 [0], given: 232

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 19 Nov 2015
Posts: 24

Kudos [?]: -23 [0], given: 61

GPA: 3.3
Reviews Badge
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2016, 22:16
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:

Responding to a pm:

The answer is (D) and not just by using POE but it makes perfect sense (also, it is an official question and the answers in those are not debatable)

Let's write the argument in our own words:

Some countries do not have compensation for whiplash injuries. There, say x whiplash injuries are reported every year.
Other countries have compensation for whiplash injuries. There, 2x whiplash injuries are reported every year.
Now, don't jump to the conclusion that half the reported cases (the extra x) in these countries are spurious - they are there just to get compensation.
Consider that people will report whiplash only if there is a reason to report it.

The bold parts are red and blue. What roles do they play?

The red part gives us some data/finding.
Then the green part points out an implication that people derive from that data and that people should not derive it.
The blue part points out why the implication derived may not be warranted.

Option (D) says exactly this.
(D) The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument;
the second is a claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from that finding.

Do let me know if something is still unclear.



Can you please tell what is the conclusion?

Kudos [?]: -23 [0], given: 61

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 191

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 110

Location: United States
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V27
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.2
Reviews Badge
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Mar 2016, 13:52
Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The conclusion is: Argument that 'in the countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious' is not justified because people often have little incentive to report whiplash injuries in countries where automobile insurance does not cover whiplash injuries.

B is wrong because the highlighted portion in the end itself is not the conclusion.

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 110

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 28 Sep 2013
Posts: 93

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 81

GMAT 1: 740 Q51 V39
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Sep 2016, 03:53
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
Responding to a pm:

The answer is (D) and not just by using POE but it makes perfect sense (also, it is an official question and the answers in those are not debatable)

Let's write the argument in our own words:

Some countries do not have compensation for whiplash injuries. There, say x whiplash injuries are reported every year.
Other countries have compensation for whiplash injuries. There, 2x whiplash injuries are reported every year.
Now, don't jump to the conclusion that half the reported cases (the extra x) in these countries are spurious - they are there just to get compensation.
Consider that people will report whiplash only if there is a reason to report it.

The bold parts are red and blue. What roles do they play?

The red part gives us some data/finding.
Then the green part points out an implication that people derive from that data and that people should not derive it.
The blue part points out why the implication derived may not be warranted.

Option (D) says exactly this.
(D) The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument;
the second is a claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from that finding.

Do let me know if something is still unclear.


Hi Karishma, I was down to C and D.
Claim/Conclusion/Position/Judgement they are interchangeably used for a conclusion, Right?

In option C and D I think the words evidence and findings also can be used interchangeably, but there is so much going wrong there in option C.
(C) The first 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.
First Part of Option C →
The first is evidence(or perhaps a finding) that has been used to support a conclusion(→ so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified; Infact this is an Intermediate conclusion) for which the argument provides further evidence;

for which the argument provides further evidence; This portion is the main culprit as the further argument is not in support of this, but against it or opposing it or contradicting it.

Does my analysis make sense to you?

(D) The first is a finding whose implications(= Conclusion = so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified.) are at issue in the argument; the second is a claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications [= conclusion(intermediate one) = so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily identified.] from that finding.
_________________

Richa Champion | My GMAT Journey - 470 720 740

Target 760+

Not Improving after Multiple attempts. I can guide You.
Contact me richacrunch2@gmail.com

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 81

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 26 Feb 2015
Posts: 110

Kudos [?]: 25 [1], given: 109

GPA: 3.92
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Dec 2016, 23:18
1
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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 identified. 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 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 find 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 [?]: 25 [1], given: 109

Top Contributor
Director
Director
User avatar
S
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Posts: 512

Kudos [?]: 574 [0], given: 6

Location: India
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2016, 16:28
Top Contributor
let us read the paragraph sentence by sentence.

1st sentence states a fact/finding. 2nd sentence contains a fact and the conclusion drawn from it. (Note the usage of 'so').

the third sentence identifies both the conclusion of the author and that of some commentators.

conclusion of the author - these facts do not warrant conclusions of some commentators. This is the main conclusion of the argument.
conclusion of some commentators - in countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.

the fourth sentence supports the main conclusion of the argument.

Let us look at each of the answer options -

A - the first statement's accuracy is not questioned by the author. The author accepts the statement as true. Only the conclusions drawn from it are in question.
the second boldface does not support the conclusion reached by the argument. It goes against the conclusion. Also, the argument does not question the accuracy of the 1st boldface statement.

B - the author accepts the first boldface as a fact. the first statement is incorrect.
the second boldface does not challenge the first boldface.

C - correct answer.
the implications from the first boldface (whether half the reported cases are spurious) are in question.
the second boldface supports the conclusion by some commentators that in countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.
The argument disagrees with this conclusion.

D - the first boldface is not a claim but a fact.
the author accepts the second part.(because she says it is true that ...)

E -the first boldface is not a claim.
_________________

Enroll for our GMAT Trial Course here -
http://gmatonline.crackverbal.com/

Learn all PS and DS strategies here-
http://gmatonline.crackverbal.com/p/mastering-quant-on-gmat

For more info on GMAT and MBA, follow us on @AskCrackVerbal

Kudos [?]: 574 [0], given: 6

Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 26 Feb 2015
Posts: 110

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 109

GPA: 3.92
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Dec 2016, 17:41
CrackVerbalGMAT wrote:
let us read the paragraph sentence by sentence.

1st sentence states a fact/finding. 2nd sentence contains a fact and the conclusion drawn from it. (Note the usage of 'so').

the third sentence identifies both the conclusion of the author and that of some commentators.

conclusion of the author - these facts do not warrant conclusions of some commentators. This is the main conclusion of the argument.
conclusion of some commentators - in countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.

the fourth sentence supports the main conclusion of the argument.

Let us look at each of the answer options -

A - the first statement's accuracy is not questioned by the author. The author accepts the statement as true. Only the conclusions drawn from it are in question.
the second boldface does not support the conclusion reached by the argument. It goes against the conclusion. Also, the argument does not question the accuracy of the 1st boldface statement.

B - the author accepts the first boldface as a fact. the first statement is incorrect.
the second boldface does not challenge the first boldface.

C - correct answer.
the implications from the first boldface (whether half the reported cases are spurious) are in question.
the second boldface supports the conclusion by some commentators that in countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.
The argument disagrees with this conclusion.

D - the first boldface is not a claim but a fact.
the author accepts the second part.(because she says it is true that ...)

E -the first boldface is not a claim.


I agree with you. Good analysis.

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 109

VP
VP
User avatar
D
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1158

Kudos [?]: 1172 [0], given: 414

Location: Malaysia
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 May 2017, 20:16
The Official Guide for GMAT Review 2017

Practice Question
Question No.: CR638
Page: 537

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 identified. 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 first is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.

(B) The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is that conclusion.

(C) The first 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 first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument; the second is a claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from that finding.

(E) The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate.

GMATNinja This question was tricky. Could you help to identify the conclusion and the claim presented in the argument?
_________________

"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”

"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."

Rules for posting in verbal forum | Please DO NOT post short answer in your post!

Kudos [?]: 1172 [0], given: 414

Current Student
User avatar
B
Joined: 05 Oct 2014
Posts: 15

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 123

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT Date: 07-23-2015
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2017, 10:13
I chose C over D. Why the first bold face line is not an evidence? It is a fact, that argument is citing. The 2nd Bold face line is the main conclusion against the evidence that the argument has given earlier. Can anybody justify the logic ???

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 123

Re: In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip   [#permalink] 22 May 2017, 10:13

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 47 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whip

  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®.