Sajjad1994
In states where companies are mandated by labor laws to provide at least 5 days of paid sick leave per year to employees, reports of absenteeism due to illness are twice as frequent as they are in states where there is no such mandate. Since it is very difficult to monitor each case of absenteeism to verify whether it is indeed a true case of illness, no accurate report of true illness-related absenteeism is available. However, this does not warrant the accusations of critics of the laws that in the states with mandated sick leave, at least half of the reported cases of absenteeism due to illness are fake. Clearly,
in states where most companies do not provide sick leave, workers do not have a strong incentive to skip work and prefer report to work while ill rather than go unpaid.In the table, select the statement that describes the role of the first bold portion and select the statement the describes the role of the second bold portion. Make two selections, one in each column.
| Role of 1st bold portion | Role of 2nd bold portion | |
| | A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument. |
| | A finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument. |
| | Evidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole. |
| | A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding. |
| | Evidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate. |
| | A claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding. |
Argument synopsis: A finding claims that people take more sick leaves in states where 5 sick leaves are mandated by labor laws as compared to those in states where there are no such mandates. The argument continues by stating that since verifying a sick leave case for its authenticity is difficult which is why data does not exist, but this lack of data does not warrant the criticism that those sick leaves are fake.
The author disagrees with people offering such criticism based on the above finding by stating that in countries where sick leaves are not mandated by labor laws, people even while sick come to work to avoid getting a pay cut
So, from this synopsis, we can safely see that there is a finding, which is used by certain people (critics) to draw out a certain conclusion, which the author totally is against and the author offers a different conclusion based on the finding
Let us now examine the answer choices
A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.
YES! The FIRST BOLD FACE portion is a finding, whose implications are stated as something by certain people/critics, which are then disputed by the author of the argumentA finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument.
Although it is a finding, but the accuracy of the finding is never doubted in the argument, its just the implications of the same that are disputedEvidence that has been used to support the argument as a whole.
No, none of the portions play the role of an evidence and certainly do not support the argumentA claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.
YES! The author in the SECOND BOLD FACE PORTION presents a claim that it is not that the leaves are fake but that people in countries where sick leaves are not a mandate are inclined to work while being sick to avoid pay cut, thus arguing against the implications derived by the critics from the finding presented in the first bold face portionEvidence presented to establish that the finding is accurate.
No, none of the portions play the role of the evidenceA claim presented in order to support deriving certain implications from a finding.
No, although the second bold face portion is a claim presented, but it is presented to ARGUE AGAINST implications from the finding, not in support of the sameAnswer:
First Bold Face: A finding whose implications are disputed in the argument.
Second Bold Face: A claim presented in order to argue against deriving certain implications from a finding.