GMAT VOCABULARY |298 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

The word argument means A conversation between two people who do not agree. It also means "a claim" Critical Reasoning Overview The Verbal Section contains 9-10 Critical Reasoning questions. You have a little less than 2 minutes on average to solve each of them, so you need to know how to solve them methodically, quickly, and correctly. To be able to do so, you need to be familiar with the Critical Reasoning question structure. A Critical Reasoning question is made of three parts: the argument, the question stem, and the answer choices. There are 9 Critical Reasoning question types Each and every Critical Reasoning argument contains at least one premise. Most arguments (but not all of them) also include a conclusion. Critical Reasoning: Argument Structure The first skill you will need in order to master Critical Reasoning questions is knowing how to correctly break down a question's argument. An argument is made up of: One or more Premises - factual data or a given; A Conclusion - statement, opinion, or judgment based on the premise(s). Overall, you should break this argument down like this: Premise: Toddlers today vs. 20yrs ago: watch more than twice as much TV Premise: Toddlers today vs. 20yrs ago: develop motor skills slower Conclusion: Toddlers who spend most of their time watching TV develop motor skills slower Identifying the conclusion You should identify a conclusion based on the content of each sentence, not its location. A conclusion could be anywhere in the argument - beginning, middle, or end. For example: Company expenses have doubled this year. Therefore, its profits will decline. The company profits will decline this year because its expenses have doubled. Bear in mind that the argument sections of some question types have no conclusion at all, such as this one, which is made up of two premises only: The company expenses have doubled this year. In addition, its sales dropped by 15%. There is no judgement or opinion, i.e. no conclusion, in this argument -- it's all pure data. Conclusions Conclusions in Critical Reasoning questions are rarely right or wrong. In most cases, they are flawed or incomplete. A conclusion is a statement made on the basis of the premise. In this case, the conclusion word therefore is used, which gives us another clue. The conclusion can be logical and valid or logically flawed. Identifying the Conclusion by Words which are not Conjunctions An argument's conclusion may also be identified by words that describe a judgment, an opinion, a prediction, or (of course) a conclusion. Some of the most commonly used words in this group "are conclude that", "contend that", "believe that", "hypothesize that", "clearly". 1. [premise]. The researcher concluded that >> [conclusion]. 2. It was hypothesized that >> [conclusion]. [premise]. 3. [premise]. The mayor believes that >> [conclusion]. 4. Clearly, >> [conclusion]. [premise]. Identifying the Premise by Findings One sign by which a premise can be identified is the use of phrases relating to scientific research or the findings of such research, such as "A study conducted in 1999 showed that...", or "A researcher studying X found that..." Example: A recent study has found that satisfied employees are more productive. Next year, company X plans to invest $20,000 in increasing employee satisfaction in order to increase productivity and therefore sales. Identifying the Conclusion by Recommendation One clue which can help you identify a conclusion is that conclusions are often recommendations made by the argument's author: 1. The company lost money last year. The company should do so and so. 2. The company lost money last year. It is recommended that the company do so and so. Any recommendation made in the argument indicates to the conclusion. Identifying Conclusion/Premise by Conjunctions Conjunctions - words such as but, because, therefore and moreover - are a great tool for identifying the argument's components: Conclusion conjunctions help us identify the conclusion, which normally appears AFTER such words. This group includes therefore, thus, consequently, hence, so, which means that, it follows that, etc. For example: Structure: [premise]. Therefore, [conclusion]. Example: Jane is hungry. Therefore, she will be making herself a sandwich soon. Reason conjunctions also help identify the conclusion, which appears BEFORE these words. Reason words include words such as because, since, and as. Structure: [conclusion] because [premise]. OR Because [premise], [conclusion] Example: Jane will be making herself a sandwich soon because she is hungry. Naturally, this means reason conjunctions can also help us identify the premise, which will appear immediately AFTER these words, as can be seen in the example above. Identifying the conclusion with no clues The bottom line: conclusions can be identified by: (a) eliminating the factual information, that is, the premise(s); or (b) noticing words that indicate which part of the argument is a judgment, opinion, or prediction about the implication of the data in the premise(s). Critical Reasoning Work Order (QATLS) This 'Work Order' may feel counter-intuitive at first, but, as in all other question types, this method of dealing with Critical Reasoning questions is meant to get you to choose the correct answer as fast as possible. If you stick to your intuition, you will waste precious time and you are more likely to choose a wrong answer choice. To solve Critical Reasoning questions: 1. Read the QUESTION STEM first 2. Read the ARGUMENT and map it, breaking it down to its components (i.e., premise, conclusion) 3. Think of a possible answer/direction/lead to the question 4. Go over the answer choices. Look for one that is similar to the one you thought of 5. Scan the remaining answer choices to make sure there isn't a better choice You may find it easier to remember the Work Order through the acronym QATLS. 1. Read the QUESTION STEM first If you read the question stem only after reading the argument, chances are you'll then read the argument again, this time in order to look for an answer to the question. This takes up precious time. On the other hand, if you read the question stem first, you'll already know what you're looking for when you turn to the argument and you'll only read the argument once, thereby saving time. 2. Read the ARGUMENT and map it, breaking it down to its components (i.e., premise, conclusion) It is crucial to map out the argument because if you don't, you increase your chances of answering the question incorrectly. For example, if the question stem asks you to strengthen the conclusion, you need to identify the conclusion and choose an answer choice that is directly related to it. Mapping the argument only takes a few seconds (you can do so while you read the argument: stop after each sentence and decide whether it's a premise or a conclusion), and not mapping the argument is not worth your while: it only means you'll answer the question more quickly, but not correctly. 3. Think of a possible answer/direction/lead to the question 4. Go over the answer choices. Look for one that is similar to the one you thought of A general rule of thumb for all the question types in the Verbal Section is that you don't want to read the answers before you thought about the question yourself. This way, you'll get to the answers more focused, knowing what to look for. It will make identifying the right answer choice easier and faster. If you don't stop for a moment after reading the question stem and the argument to think about what the answer could be, but rather go over the answer choices first, you're at a risk of being caught by answer choices that seem to make sense although they're not exactly the answer to the question asked. These are known as distractors 5. Scan the remaining answer choices to make sure there isn't a better choice This is done to make sure you made the right choice. If you did, then the remaining answer choices will be easily eliminated. If, for example you chose answer choice (B), and then answer choice (D) looks just as good, you should give it some thought. Logic over content Despite appearances, the content of a question is really the shell, the cover for a certain structure. Your attention should be focused on the logical relations between the argument's components: the underlying assumptions in the argument that link the premise to the conclusion, how logical the conclusion is, etc. Therefore, if you see an argument that deals with microbiology, which happens to be a field you know nothing about, have no fear. You don't need to be familiar with any of the subjects of the arguments on the GMAT. Instead, you only need to be able to look beyond the content and identify the logical structure. Distractors are based on content rather than logic. It relates to the background "story", but this story has no direct relevance to the argument's logical structure. As much as this "story" can be appealing and seem true, don't let it distract you -- use your x-ray vision and look at the logical structure! Focus on premises, assumptions, conclusions and how they're all connected. The Straight and Narrow Principle The correct answer to Critical Reasoning questions is the one that answers the question in the simplest, shortest, most immediate way. For example, if the question stem asks you on which assumption the argument relies, the correct answer is an assumption that does not presuppose any other assumptions or any other logical steps. Do not fall for an answer that could be correct if we assume certain things or that would be correct in certain cases only. In the journey to success in Critical Reasoning, the long and winding road is not the right way to take... Vocabulary for Critical Reasoning: Underlie To underlie means to be at the basis of, to lie under something or be situated under something. it signifies to form the basis of. Instead of saying A is based on B, we may say B underlies A. A defect in a single part of the brain underlies the reading difficulties of dyslexics. Which of the following is an assumption underlying the argument's conclusion? Vocabulary for Critical Reasoning: Flaw/Flawed A flaw (noun) is a defect, fault or imperfection. The word flawed is an adjective meaning defective, faulty or imperfect. John is not perfect. He is flawed. He has several flaws, which is only human. These words are very important in the GMAT. They are used in both Critical Reasoning and in the Analysis of an Argument essay. Vocabulary for Critical Reasoning: Discrepancy Discrepancy means inconsistency, contradiction or difference. As in many other words, in this case the prefix dis- has a negative context. A few well-known examples are appear-disappear, ability-disability, and connect-disconnect. A learning disability is often responsible for the discrepancy between a child's high intelligence and poor academic achievements. In the GMAT verbal section, you are likely to see the word discrepancy in Critical Reasoning questions, specifically in a Critical Reasoning question type called Paradox Questions. Which of the following, if true, best reconciles the seeming discrepancy described above? Vocabulary for Critical Reasoning : Undermine Undermine means about the same as weaken. To undermine means to weaken the validity of something or to raise doubt about its correctness. A presidential candidate tries to undermine his or her political rivals. The word undermine is commonly used in Critical Reasoning Conclusion Weakening questions. Example: Which of the following, if true, undermines the author's conclusion? Undermining a conclusion shows the logical flaws in that conclusion and, therefore, proves that it is invalid. Other words/phrases that are also used in Critical Reasoning Conclusion Weakening questions and are similar in meaning are cast doubt and call into question. Vocabulary for Critical Reasoning : Reconcile To reconcile means to resolve, to settle or to bring back to harmony. Conflict management is used to help people and organizations reconcile their differences with others. You are likely to encounter this word in Critical Reasoning Paradox questions. Vocabulary for Critical Reasoning : Cast Doubt Cast doubt means about the same as weaken. A recent study casts doubt on the theory that there is water on Mars. The phrase cast doubt is often used in Critical Reasoning Conclusion Weakening questions. Example: Which of the following, if true, casts the strongest doubt on the argument's conclusion? Other words/phrases that are similar in meaning are undermine and call into question. Vocabulary for Critical Reasoning : Call into question Call into question means about the same as weaken. A Canadian court decision calls into question thousands of Toronto traffic tickets because a sign was not written in both English and French. The phrase call into question is often used in Critical Reasoning Conclusion Weakening questions. Which of the following, if true, calls into question the argument's conclusion? Critical Reasoning: Inference Questions Unlike most Critical Reasoning questions, in which the argument consists of both a premise and a conclusion, in Inference Questions, the argument consists of premises only - there's no conclusion. The question stem asks you to draw a conclusion based on these premises. Example: John was late for work 6 times during the past month. Moreover, John's new boss does not like him. Finally, John's company has recently lost close to $24,000 as a direct result of a mistake John had made. Inference Question Tip #1 The correct answer choice is the one that makes a SMALL step beyond the premises. The inference is not a giant leap, and should not presuppose any assumptions, but rather be the immediate, closest conclusion that directly results from the premises. For example, a possible answer to the question in example 1 is the following: Correct: John is unlikely to get a promotion or a raise any time soon. The following sentence, on the other hand, is unlikely to be a correct answer to the question: Incorrect: Jane will break up with John after he loses his job. In other words, we are looking for the conclusion that MUST stem from the argument, NOT for a conclusion that COULD stem from it. Inference Question Tip #2 The same tone (positive, negative, neutral) that is felt in the argument should also be present in the correct answer. For example, the data in example 1 presents John in a negative light, so the conclusion should also be negative. This enables us to eliminate answer such as the following: Incorrect: John is likely to be voted employee of the year. Inference Question Distractors 1. An answer choice that introduces a new premise rather than draws a conclusion on the basis of the existing premises. An example of such an answer choice to the question above could be: Distractor: Jane repeatedly tells John that he should make an effort to get to work on time. 2. An answer choice that draws a far-fetched conclusion, one that goes too far from the premises presented in the argument. We saw an example of such an answer choice in the above example: Distractor: Jane will break up with John after he loses his job. Critical Reasoning: Paradox Questions In Paradox questions the argument consists of premises only - there's NO conclusion. The premises seem to contradict each other, thus creating a paradox or a discrepancy. The question stem asks you to choose an answer choice that resolves this paradox. The correct answer is a new premise that resolves the paradox successfully and logically. Company X made a very small profit last year. However, the company's CFO received a bonus as well as a raise. How can we resolve this paradox? Company X was predicted to lose a lot of money, and the CFO, through hard work, managed to change this. Had it not been for her, the company would have made no profit at all and would have lost money. Critical Reasoning: Profit/Revenues/Expenses Questions profit = revenues - expenses Last year, there was a sharp rise in the price of movie tickets in Country X. However, the profit of the entertainment industry went down 15%. The first premise deals with revenues (we will assume that because quantity is not mentioned, a rise in prices means a rise in revenues- whatever is not mentioned has to be taken as a constant), telling us they went up. We would expect that in such a case, profit will go up as well (again assuming that the number of tickets sold remained approximately the same). The second premise, however, tells us that profit went down, which creates a paradox. When the question provides information on two out of the three parameters (in this case, revenues and profit), this indicates the answer choice should revolve around the third parameter (expenses). In this case, the expenses of the movie industry should account for the paradox. Critical Reasoning: Argument Flaw Questions Argument Flaw questions ask us to find a logical flaw in the argument. Since the premise cannot be flawed, the flaw will be either in the conclusion or in an assumption underlying the conclusion Many times, detecting the flaw in the argument involves carefully looking for differences in terminology/parameters between the premise and the conclusion. Critical Reasoning: Assumption Questions We can find the hidden assumption in several ways: 1. The assumption is what the argument's author would say if asked, "How did you get to that conclusion? Why?" 2. The assumption is the completion of the sentence "The conclusion is true only if we assume that..." 3. Premise + Assumption = Conclusion Assumption = Conclusion - Premise 4. Premise --> Assumption --> Conclusion Critical Reasoning: Assumption Questions Distractors The most common distractor for Assumption Questions is an answer choice that introduces a new premise rather than links the existing premise to the conclusion. Note that the assumption isn't necessarily valid or logical. Some assumptions are quite dodgy and questionable. It's okay, though, because it's not YOU who makes these sometimes absurd assumptions. Critical Reasoning: Conclusion Strengthening Questions Critical Reasoning Conclusion Strengthening questions ask you - surprise, surprise - to strengthen the argument's conclusion. The correct answer is a premise which strengthens the argument's conclusion. There are several ways of strengthening a conclusion: 1. Identifying and strengthening an assumption underlying the conclusion. Example: On Wednesday, John was late for work. On Thursday, John was fired. Therefore, if Jane does not want to lose her job, she should get to work on time. An assumption that underlies the conclusion is that John was fired BECAUSE he was late for work. In other words, being late is the CAUSE of firing John. Therefore, we can strengthen the conclusion by choosing an answer choice which shows this assumption to be valid, such as: Jane's boss has been known to fire excellent employees simply because they were late for work. Critical Reasoning: Conclusion Strengthening Questions (Part 2) 2. Strengthening or validating the conclusion itself: Example: Oldway school requires that students submit handwritten papers. Modernway school requires that students type and print their papers. The average GPA of Modernway school's students is higher than that of Oldway school's students. Therefore, schools should encourage students to type assignments rather than write them. The conclusion favors typing over handwriting. Strengthening it directly can be done by pointing out an advantage of typing or a disadvantage of writing. It is recommended to write down the following on the scratch paper: type + write - This will help us focus on the answer we are looking for, and to have something measure answer choices up against. The correct answer could be the following, as it cites an advantage of typing: More students neglect to submit assignments when they are required to write them than when they have to type them. Critical Reasoning: Conclusion Strengthening Questions (Part 3) 3. Ruling out alternative explanations. An alternative explanation can weaken a conclusion. So an answer choice that says that an alternative explanation is wrong serves to strengthen the explanation. Example: Oldway school requires that students submit handwritten papers. Modernway school requires that students type and print their papers. The average GPA of Modernway school's students is higher than that of Oldway school's students. Therefore, schools should encourage students to type assignments rather than write them. If someone wanted to weaken our conclusion, they could try to give an alternative explanation to the difference in the average GPA of the schools - perhaps the cause is not the different paper writing styles, but rather a difference in IQ and socioeconomic background of the student bodies, for example. So an answer choice that eliminates an alternative explanation will strengthen the conclusion, and might be the correct answer choice. For example: Students in Oldway school have the same average IQ and socioeconomic background as students in Modernway school. Critical Reasoning: Conclusion Strengthening Questions (Part 4) 4. Citing similar cases in which the conclusion holds. Let's illustrate this way through example 1: On Wednesday, John was late for work. On Thursday, John was fired. Therefore, if Jane does not want to lose her job, she should get to work on time. By choosing an answer choice which provides more examples that support the conclusion, we strengthen it. Here's an example of such an answer choice: 12 of John's colleagues were also late for work on Wednesday, and all of them were also fired.