WGU D265 CRITICAL THINKING: REASONING AND
EVIDENCE | OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT 2026/2027 Actual
Questions & Verified Answers | Advanced Analytical
Reasoning | Pass Guarantee
SECTION 1: Advanced Argument Deconstruction (Questions 1-25)
1. Passage: The recent surge in telehealth adoption during the pandemic has
fundamentally transformed healthcare delivery, proving that remote care is not only
viable but superior to in-person visits for most conditions. Studies show that patient
satisfaction scores for telehealth appointments average 15% higher than traditional
office visits. Moreover, telehealth reduces overhead costs for providers, which logically
means they can allocate more resources toward actual patient care rather than
administrative burdens. Since technology has already solved the primary challenges of
remote diagnosis through AI-powered symptom checkers and wearable devices, we
must conclude that in-person medical consultations are an outdated model that should
be phased out entirely in favor of universal telehealth.
Question: The argument's conclusion that "in-person medical consultations are an
outdated model that should be phased out entirely" relies on which unstated premise?
A) Patient satisfaction is the sole indicator of healthcare quality
,B) Technology has eliminated all diagnostic uncertainties in remote care
C) Cost reduction for providers directly translates to improved patient outcomes
D) What is viable during a pandemic remains optimal in normal circumstances
Correct Answer: D
Rationale: The argument extrapolates from pandemic-era telehealth success to a
universal claim without establishing that pandemic conditions (lockdowns, patient
reluctance to leave home, altered healthcare needs) are representative of normal
healthcare contexts. This is the missing bridge premise. Choice A misidentifies the
premise—the argument implies satisfaction matters but doesn't claim it's the sole
indicator. Choice B is too absolute; the argument claims technology has solved
"primary" challenges, not all uncertainties. Choice C reflects an unstated assumption
but isn't the primary premise supporting the radical conclusion about phasing out
in-person care. The critical gap is the unsupported generalization from crisis-mode
viability to permanent superiority.
2. Passage: A recent study found that individuals who meditate for 30 minutes daily
score 20% higher on creativity assessments than non-meditators. The study controlled
for age, education, and baseline stress levels. Because creativity is essential for
innovation, and innovation drives economic growth, we can infer that implementing
mandatory daily meditation programs in all workplaces would significantly boost the
national economy within five years. Critics who point to the study's small sample size
(n=120) fail to understand that statistical significance was achieved, making the findings
generalizable to the entire workforce.
,Question: Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the argument for
mandatory workplace meditation?
A) The creativity assessment used has been shown to have poor predictive validity for
real-world innovative performance
B) The meditators in the study were all volunteers from high-income backgrounds
C) Countries with existing workplace meditation programs show no correlation with GDP
growth
D) The study measured creativity immediately after meditation sessions, not long-term
effects
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: This strikes at the argument's core causal chain: meditation → creativity →
innovation → economic growth. If the creativity measure doesn't predict innovation, the
entire chain collapses regardless of other factors. While B, C, and D each identify
weaknesses (selection bias, ecological validity, temporal validity), they don't sever the
fundamental connection as decisively as A. The argument's strength depends entirely
on the assumption that measured creativity translates to innovative performance.
3. Passage: Universal Basic Income (UBI) proponents argue that providing every citizen
with $1,000 monthly would eliminate poverty because the payment would raise
everyone's income above the poverty line. They point to a pilot program in Stockton,
California where participants reported reduced financial anxiety. Since financial anxiety
, is a primary cause of poor health outcomes, and poor health outcomes burden the
healthcare system, UBI would simultaneously solve poverty and reduce healthcare
costs. Any society that refuses to implement UBI therefore values economic theory over
human wellbeing.
Question: The argument employs which type of logical structure?
A) Convergent argument with multiple independent premises supporting a single
conclusion
B) Linked argument where each premise depends on the previous one in a causal chain
C) Simple deductive syllogism with two premises and a necessary conclusion
D) Analogical argument comparing Stockton to the entire nation
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: This is a classic linked argument forming a causal chain: UBI → reduced
poverty → reduced financial anxiety → improved health → reduced healthcare costs →
moral imperative. Each link depends on the previous; if any connection fails (e.g., if
financial anxiety doesn't significantly cause poor health), the entire argument weakens.
It's not convergent (A) because the premises don't independently support the
conclusion. It's not a simple syllogism (C) due to its length and multiple inferential steps.
While it uses an example, it's not primarily analogical (D)—the Stockton data is used as
empirical support, not as a systematic comparison.
EVIDENCE | OBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT 2026/2027 Actual
Questions & Verified Answers | Advanced Analytical
Reasoning | Pass Guarantee
SECTION 1: Advanced Argument Deconstruction (Questions 1-25)
1. Passage: The recent surge in telehealth adoption during the pandemic has
fundamentally transformed healthcare delivery, proving that remote care is not only
viable but superior to in-person visits for most conditions. Studies show that patient
satisfaction scores for telehealth appointments average 15% higher than traditional
office visits. Moreover, telehealth reduces overhead costs for providers, which logically
means they can allocate more resources toward actual patient care rather than
administrative burdens. Since technology has already solved the primary challenges of
remote diagnosis through AI-powered symptom checkers and wearable devices, we
must conclude that in-person medical consultations are an outdated model that should
be phased out entirely in favor of universal telehealth.
Question: The argument's conclusion that "in-person medical consultations are an
outdated model that should be phased out entirely" relies on which unstated premise?
A) Patient satisfaction is the sole indicator of healthcare quality
,B) Technology has eliminated all diagnostic uncertainties in remote care
C) Cost reduction for providers directly translates to improved patient outcomes
D) What is viable during a pandemic remains optimal in normal circumstances
Correct Answer: D
Rationale: The argument extrapolates from pandemic-era telehealth success to a
universal claim without establishing that pandemic conditions (lockdowns, patient
reluctance to leave home, altered healthcare needs) are representative of normal
healthcare contexts. This is the missing bridge premise. Choice A misidentifies the
premise—the argument implies satisfaction matters but doesn't claim it's the sole
indicator. Choice B is too absolute; the argument claims technology has solved
"primary" challenges, not all uncertainties. Choice C reflects an unstated assumption
but isn't the primary premise supporting the radical conclusion about phasing out
in-person care. The critical gap is the unsupported generalization from crisis-mode
viability to permanent superiority.
2. Passage: A recent study found that individuals who meditate for 30 minutes daily
score 20% higher on creativity assessments than non-meditators. The study controlled
for age, education, and baseline stress levels. Because creativity is essential for
innovation, and innovation drives economic growth, we can infer that implementing
mandatory daily meditation programs in all workplaces would significantly boost the
national economy within five years. Critics who point to the study's small sample size
(n=120) fail to understand that statistical significance was achieved, making the findings
generalizable to the entire workforce.
,Question: Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the argument for
mandatory workplace meditation?
A) The creativity assessment used has been shown to have poor predictive validity for
real-world innovative performance
B) The meditators in the study were all volunteers from high-income backgrounds
C) Countries with existing workplace meditation programs show no correlation with GDP
growth
D) The study measured creativity immediately after meditation sessions, not long-term
effects
Correct Answer: A
Rationale: This strikes at the argument's core causal chain: meditation → creativity →
innovation → economic growth. If the creativity measure doesn't predict innovation, the
entire chain collapses regardless of other factors. While B, C, and D each identify
weaknesses (selection bias, ecological validity, temporal validity), they don't sever the
fundamental connection as decisively as A. The argument's strength depends entirely
on the assumption that measured creativity translates to innovative performance.
3. Passage: Universal Basic Income (UBI) proponents argue that providing every citizen
with $1,000 monthly would eliminate poverty because the payment would raise
everyone's income above the poverty line. They point to a pilot program in Stockton,
California where participants reported reduced financial anxiety. Since financial anxiety
, is a primary cause of poor health outcomes, and poor health outcomes burden the
healthcare system, UBI would simultaneously solve poverty and reduce healthcare
costs. Any society that refuses to implement UBI therefore values economic theory over
human wellbeing.
Question: The argument employs which type of logical structure?
A) Convergent argument with multiple independent premises supporting a single
conclusion
B) Linked argument where each premise depends on the previous one in a causal chain
C) Simple deductive syllogism with two premises and a necessary conclusion
D) Analogical argument comparing Stockton to the entire nation
Correct Answer: B
Rationale: This is a classic linked argument forming a causal chain: UBI → reduced
poverty → reduced financial anxiety → improved health → reduced healthcare costs →
moral imperative. Each link depends on the previous; if any connection fails (e.g., if
financial anxiety doesn't significantly cause poor health), the entire argument weakens.
It's not convergent (A) because the premises don't independently support the
conclusion. It's not a simple syllogism (C) due to its length and multiple inferential steps.
While it uses an example, it's not primarily analogical (D)—the Stockton data is used as
empirical support, not as a systematic comparison.
