Critical Reasoning

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 identifi ed. 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 fi rst is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The fi rst is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is
that conclusion.
(C) The fi rst 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 fi rst 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 fi nding.
(E) The fi rst is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to
establish that the fi nding is accurate.

OA - after some discussions

muralimba 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 identifi ed. 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 fi rst is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The fi rst is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is
that conclusion.
(C) The fi rst 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 fi rst 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 fi nding.
(E) The fi rst is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to
establish that the fi nding is accurate.

OA - after some discussions

I would go for D

prachich1987 wrote:

muralimba 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 identifi ed. 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 fi rst is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The fi rst is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is
that conclusion.
(C) The fi rst 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 fi rst 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 fi nding.
(E) The fi rst is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to
establish that the fi nding is accurate.

OA - after some discussions

I would go for D

Please explain your answer.

muralimba wrote:

prachich1987 wrote:

muralimba 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 identifi ed. 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 fi rst is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The fi rst is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is
that conclusion.
(C) The fi rst 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 fi rst 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 fi nding.
(E) The fi rst is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to
establish that the fi nding is accurate.

OA - after some discussions

I would go for D

Please explain your answer.

What's the OA?

(A) The fi rst is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.---The second part is not based on the first part rather it contradicts the first part.
(B) The fi rst is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is
that conclusion.---- The first bold part doesn't support the second bold part .It contradicts.
(C) The fi rst 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 first bold part doesn't support the second bold part .It contradicts.
(D) The fi rst 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 fi nding.---Right
(E) The fi rst is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to
establish that the fi nding is accurate.---It's clearly wrong.The second part clearly states that the finding are wrong.

1. In countries where whiplash claims are covered by insurance there are more reports of whiplash
2. Some say this means many of the reports of whiplash must be false
3. The author disagrees because people simply do not bother reporting it since they cant be compensated for it

A. Incorrect. His argument does not dispute the claim at all.

B. Incorrect. The first does not support the second.

C. Incorrect. He is not using the first as evidence

D. Correct. In this passage the first statement leads to an implication that whiplash cases are often false, which the author disagrees with. The second is his claim that casts doubt on using the first to derive that implication.

E. Incorrect. The accuracy of the first statement is never argued or debated.

yay the answer is D!!

This is how I nailed it...

the first sentence is a simple statement - "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." now the validity of the same is being checked in the subsequent three sentences...

"The first is a finding whose implications are at issue in the argument;" exactly fits the bill.... the second part part of the answer choice D, just perfectly falls in place too!

What's the OA?

Can Someone Pls tell me the source ?

mundasingh123 wrote:Can Someone Pls tell me the source ?

Mr Singh...you are really great.....you have asked these questions 10 times more than u have ever answered those questions....dude...get a life....

Fact 1 (finding): In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation for whiplash injuries (Subject) sustained in automobile accidents, reports of having suffered such injuries are twice as frequent (comparative term) as they are in countries where whiplash is not covered (propositional term No`negation).
Fact 2 (finding): [/b]Presently, no objective test (propositional term No`negation) for whiplash exists,
Intermediary conclusion (inference): so it is true that spurious reports of whiplash injuries cannot be readily (propositional term No`negation) identified.
Intermediary conclusion (inference): Nevertheless, these facts do not warrant (propositional term No`negation) the conclusion drawn by some commentators that in the countries with the higher rates (comparative term) of reported whiplash injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.
Conclusion (deduction, Must be present with subject, concluded in true/false statement of relationship): Clearly, in countries where automobile insurance does not include compensation for whiplash (Subject), 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? <-- Finding, Conclusion without reference to comparative term (incomplete conclusion, no true/false statement about relationship)

(A) The fi rst is a claim that the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion that has been based on that claim.
(B) The fi rst is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion that the argument accepts; the second is
that conclusion.
(C) The fi rst 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 fi rst 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 fi nding.
(E) The fi rst is a fi nding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented to
establish that the fi nding is accurate.

answer D is correct.

pesfunk wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:Can Someone Pls tell me the source ?

Mr Singh...you are really great.....you have asked these questions 10 times more than u have ever answered those questions....dude...get a life....

LOL Whats ur Problem Mr Manish
Why crowd the thread when others have already come up with the right answer and some have come up with the right expalanations which makes my reply redundant.
But if i get to know its a MGMAT quest or a Gmat Prep quest i and others can avoid it so that the test condition are not violated.
U seem to be of the category who always like to nitpick others
Mr Manish, In Life there is always more than what meets the eye.So Its Time U understood Life
And it would be helluva a benefit to u if u stop being arrogant on a Public Forum and be a bit more polite , humble and nice to others.

I hate these questions. Can anyone give more pointers and examples on how I can attack them? Thanks!

its from OG 12

mundasingh123 wrote:Can Someone Pls tell me the source ?

cyrwr1 wrote:I hate these questions. Can anyone give more pointers and examples on how I can attack them? Thanks!

https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/02/ ... ce-problem

This article might help with the 'Bold face' questions.