The highway police authority has put up large boards at regular intervals along the highway, indicating the maximum speed limit and warning about the dangers of over speeding. On this basis, which of the following assumptions are implicit? I. Most motorists may drive their vehicles within the speed limit on the highways. II. Motorists generally ignore such cautions and continue to over speed on the highways.

Introduction / Context:
This statement and assumption question concerns road safety measures. Highway authorities put up signboards indicating speed limits and warning about over speeding. Assumptions are the unstated beliefs that justify taking this step. If the authorities believed that signs have no effect at all, they would not spend time and money installing them. We must decide which of the two given assumptions is implied by this action and which, if any, is not.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement: Large boards showing speed limits and dangers of over speeding are installed at regular intervals along the highway.
• Assumption I: Most motorists may drive within the speed limit when they see these boards.
• Assumption II: Motorists generally ignore such cautions and continue to over speed.
• Authorities act with the expectation that their measures will have some positive impact.

Concept / Approach:
When a body invests in warning boards, it assumes that at least some drivers will respond by changing behaviour. If the agency believed that motorists generally ignore all warnings, it would not see value in putting up boards, and might instead enforce rules only through fines and checks. Therefore, assumption I, that motorists may drive within the speed limit after reading the board, is naturally implicit. Assumption II, that motorists generally ignore such cautions, contradicts the intention behind installing boards and cannot be considered implicit in this context.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Focus on the action: investing in large boards at regular intervals means resources are spent on communication.Step 2: This action makes sense only if the authority believes that boards will influence at least most or many motorists to obey the speed limits.Step 3: That belief is captured in Assumption I, which says that most motorists may drive within the speed limit when cautioned.Step 4: Assumption II claims that motorists generally ignore such warnings and still over speed, which would make boards ineffective.Step 5: If the authority truly believed Assumption II, spending on boards would appear pointless, so II cannot be implicit.

Verification / Alternative check:
Deny Assumption I and suppose motorists will not adjust speed when warned. In that case the signboards would not help, which conflicts with the decision to install them.Deny Assumption II and suppose motorists do not usually ignore warnings. Then boards are more likely to be effective, which fits with the statement.Thus only Assumption I is consistent with and required by the given action.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option B is wrong because Assumption II describes behaviour that would make the boards useless, so it cannot be an assumption behind installing them.Option C is wrong because the two assumptions are not interchangeable; one supports the action and the other undermines it.Option D is wrong because both assumptions cannot be implicit together; they contradict each other.

Common Pitfalls:
Students sometimes mistake real life observations such as some drivers ignoring boards for assumptions behind the authority s choice.Another pitfall is failing to notice that assumptions for a policy are usually optimistic about its impact, not pessimistic.

Final Answer:
Hence only the first assumption is implicit in the decision to install warning boards, so the correct answer is If only assumption I is Implicit.