• Free Practice Test & Review
How would you score if you took the GMAT

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• Get 300+ Practice Questions
25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• 5 Day FREE Trial
Study Smarter, Not Harder

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• FREE GMAT Exam
Know how you'd score today for $0 Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Free Veritas GMAT Class Experience Lesson 1 Live Free Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Award-winning private GMAT tutoring Register now and save up to$200

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• 1 Hour Free
BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• Magoosh
Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• 5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• Free Trial & Practice Exam
BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

## Authors writing detective stories

This topic has 1 expert reply and 1 member reply
BTGmoderatorDC Moderator
Joined
07 Sep 2017
Posted:
710 messages
Followed by:
4 members

#### Authors writing detective stories

Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:58 am
Authors writing detective stories frequently include a brilliant detective and an incompetent investigator who embark on separate paths in an attempt to solve a crime. The separate accounts frequently consist of the incompetent investigator becoming distracted by the criminals' well-planned attempts and the competent detective solving the case after a violent confrontation. Many literary analysts believe authors often choose this storyline in an attempt to provide readers additional complexity and challenge in solving the investigation.
Which of the following most logically follows from the statements above?

A) A well-written detective story consists of an investigation being undertaken by a competent and incompetent investigator.
B) Some authors use an incompetent investigator to show the complexities of an investigation.
C) Authors never write stories with incompetent investigators who solve a case correctly.
D) Authors can use the separate investigative accounts to make predicting the correct outcome of the investigation more difficult.
E) Authors write stories with competent and incompetent investigators to show the complexity of real life.

Can some Experts explain logically?

OA D

### GMAT/MBA Expert

EconomistGMATTutor GMAT Instructor
Joined
04 Oct 2017
Posted:
551 messages
Followed by:
10 members
Upvotes:
180
Top Reply
Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:29 am
This question asks you to draw a conclusion from the given evidence. The correct choice MUST be true.

Choice A: This choice states that there is only one way to construct a "well-written detective story." This cannot be concluded from the argument.
Choice B: This one might tempt you. Some authors DO use an incompetent investigator. However, the passage does not say that this is done to "show the complexities of an investigation." Using both an incompetent and a competent investigator is done to provide complexity to the reader in solving the investigation.
Choice C: This is too definite a claim. Never? The passage uses the term "frequently," not "always."
Choice D: This is the correct choice. Notice the less definite wording, which is often found in the correct choice in inference questions. Yes, authors CAN use
separate investigative accounts to make predicting the outcome more difficult. This is is virtually a paraphrase of the last sentence of the passage.
Choice E: Real life is not mentioned in the passage.

I'm available if you'd like a follow up.

_________________
GMAT Prep From The Economist
We offer 70+ point score improvement money back guarantee.
Our average student improves 98 points.

Free 7-Day Test Prep with Economist GMAT Tutor - Receive free access to the top-rated GMAT prep course including a 1-on-1 strategy session, 2 full-length tests, and 5 ask-a-tutor messages. Get started now.
BTGmoderatorDC Moderator
Joined
07 Sep 2017
Posted:
710 messages
Followed by:
4 members
Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:23 pm
EconomistGMATTutor wrote:
This question asks you to draw a conclusion from the given evidence. The correct choice MUST be true.

Choice A: This choice states that there is only one way to construct a "well-written detective story." This cannot be concluded from the argument.
Choice B: This one might tempt you. Some authors DO use an incompetent investigator. However, the passage does not say that this is done to "show the complexities of an investigation." Using both an incompetent and a competent investigator is done to provide complexity to the reader in solving the investigation.
Choice C: This is too definite a claim. Never? The passage uses the term "frequently," not "always."
Choice D: This is the correct choice. Notice the less definite wording, which is often found in the correct choice in inference questions. Yes, authors CAN use
separate investigative accounts to make predicting the outcome more difficult. This is is virtually a paraphrase of the last sentence of the passage.
Choice E: Real life is not mentioned in the passage.

I'm available if you'd like a follow up.
Thanks a lot!

### Top First Responders*

1 GMATGuruNY 64 first replies
2 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma... 48 first replies
3 Brent@GMATPrepNow 39 first replies
4 Jay@ManhattanReview 24 first replies
5 Terry@ThePrinceto... 10 first replies
* Only counts replies to topics started in last 30 days
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members

### Most Active Experts

1 GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

128 posts
2 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

EMPOWERgmat

114 posts
3 Scott@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

92 posts
4 Jeff@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

90 posts
5 Max@Math Revolution

Math Revolution

85 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts