Critical Reasoning: Argument Evaluation

176 soru

Soru 141Soru

A municipal public transit authority plans to address its operational deficit by installing automated turnstile gates at all underground metro stations and laying off all human ticket inspectors. The authority's financial analysts claim that because the annual maintenance cost of the automated gates will be significantly less than the total annual salaries of the inspectors, implementing this plan is guaranteed to decrease the authority's net operating deficit in its first year. Which of the following would it be most useful to determine in order to evaluate the validity of the financial analysts' conclusion?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Whether passenger fare evasion is likely to increase significantly following the removal of human ticket inspectors

Cevap

Determining whether passenger fare evasion is likely to increase significantly following the removal of human ticket inspectors is most useful for evaluating the argument.
The correct option addresses an unstated financial variable: revenue from ticket sales. Operating deficit equals operating expenses minus revenue. The premises establish that one category of expenses (maintenance) is lower than another (salaries). However, if replacing human inspectors with automated gates leads to higher fare evasion, the resulting loss in ticket revenue could outweigh the net expense savings. Applying the Test of Variance: if fare evasion increases significantly, the plan will fail to decrease the deficit; if fare evasion does not increase, the plan will succeed. Because extreme answers produce opposite impacts on the conclusion's validity, this information is critical.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument structure
Premise: Automated gate annual maintenance costs are significantly lower than total annual inspector salaries. Conclusion: Installing gates and laying off inspectors is guaranteed to decrease the net operating deficit in the first year.
The conclusion relies on the assumption that salary savings minus maintenance costs represents the total net financial impact of the policy change.
2
Identify the unstated logical gap
The argument considers expenses (salaries vs. maintenance) but completely ignores revenue impacts (ticket sales and fare enforcement).
Net operating deficit is calculated as Total Operating Expenses minus Total Revenue. Any change affecting revenue directly impacts the deficit.
3
Apply the Test of Variance to the evaluating question
If fare evasion increases significantly without human inspectors, the revenue lost from unpaid fares could easily exceed the net salary savings, causing the net operating deficit to increase (weakening the conclusion). Conversely, if fare evasion does not increase, the net cost savings will reduce the deficit as claimed (strengthening the conclusion).
The opposite extreme answers to this question yield opposite effects on the validity of the analysts' conclusion, confirming it as the correct evaluation criteria.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Argument Validity and Test of Variance
Soru 142Soru

Consider the following argument: An agricultural biotechnology firm plans to market a automated seed-analysis device to commercial grain farmers. The firm predicts that launching this device will significantly increase its annual operating profits because the device reduces sample processing time by 50 percent, allowing farmers to test twice as many seeds in a single day without incurring additional labor costs.

Evaluating the following statement: Determining whether commercial grain farmers currently experience a bottleneck in seed testing that restricts their total volume of seed purchases is a relevant test of variance for evaluating the validity of the firm's profit prediction.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

The statement is True. Evaluating whether farmers currently face a testing bottleneck passes the Test of Variance because opposite answers directly strengthen or weaken the conclusion that the device will increase operating profits.
The statement is correct because the proposed criterion directly satisfies the Test of Variance. If farmers are currently bottlenecked by testing speed, doubling speed creates real economic value and drives sales, strengthening the conclusion. If farmers have no unfulfilled testing demand, extra speed provides no incentive to purchase, weakening the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument structure
Premise: The new device reduces processing time by 50%, enabling farmers to test twice as many seeds at no extra labor cost. Conclusion: Marketing this device will significantly increase the firm's annual operating profits.
Identifying the link between the mechanism (higher processing capacity) and the outcome (increased profit) exposes the underlying assumption of market demand.
2
Apply the Test of Variance to the proposed evaluation criterion
Evaluate extreme outcome 1 (Yes, a bottleneck exists): Farmers need more capacity, so faster testing leads to increased device adoption and sales, supporting higher profits. Evaluate extreme outcome 2 (No, no bottleneck exists): Farmers already test all necessary seeds, so faster testing yields no added commercial value or extra sales, defeating the profit expectation.
The Test of Variance assesses whether opposite extreme answers to a question produce opposing impacts on the conclusion's logical strength.
3
Determine statement truth value
Since the proposed question produces opposite evaluative outcomes, it is a valid and crucial factor in assessing argument validity.
A factor that differentiates between a viable financial plan and an ineffective one is inherently relevant to evaluating argument validity.

Anahtar Kavram

Test of Variance in Evaluating Argument Validity
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Soru 143Soru

A municipal water authority plans to install automated acoustic leak detectors along its primary underground distribution pipeline network. City officials calculate that detecting subterranean micro-leaks early will save millions of gallons of treated water annually, thereby reducing overall water purification and pumping costs by significantly more than the installation and maintenance expense of the sensors. Therefore, city officials conclude that implementing this sensor network will increase the municipal water utility's net annual operating budget surplus.

Which of the following would it be most useful to establish in order to evaluate the validity of the argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Whether subterranean vibrations from surface vehicle traffic frequently trigger false alarm signals in the sensors that require manual on-site inspection by technicians.

Cevap

Determining whether ambient traffic vibrations trigger frequent false alarms that require costly manual inspections by utility technicians is the most useful factor for evaluating the argument's validity.
The correct answer provides a critical unknown operational variable. If subterranean traffic vibrations cause frequent false positives, utility technicians must be dispatched to manually verify non-existent leaks, introducing substantial unanticipated labor and inspection costs. If these secondary costs exceed the net purification and pumping savings, the net operating budget surplus will decrease rather than increase. Conversely, if false alarms rarely occur, the projected financial surplus remains intact. Because opposite answers to this question produce opposite impacts on the viability of the plan, it is the most decisive factor for evaluating the argument's validity.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument structure into premises and conclusion
Premise: Acoustic sensors save water, cutting purification/pumping costs by an amount greater than sensor purchase/maintenance cost. Conclusion: Implementing the sensor network will increase the utility's net annual operating budget surplus.
Evaluating validity requires identifying the logical gap between the stated cost savings and the final net budget outcome.
2
Identify the unstated assumption in the financial projection
The argument assumes that sensor purchase and routine maintenance are the only significant new costs introduced by the program.
If hidden or auxiliary operational costs arise from operating the system, total costs might exceed savings.
3
Apply the Test of Variance to evaluate potential evaluation questions
Testing extreme outcomes for false alarm inspection costs: If YES (false alarms are frequent and expensive to inspect), total costs rise and net surplus drops (weakens argument). If NO (false alarms are rare/inexpensive), net surplus increases as projected (strengthens argument).
A valid evaluation criteria must produce opposite impacts on the argument's conclusion when answered at opposite extreme ends of the spectrum.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Argument Validity & Test of Variance
Tahmini Süre:1m 40s
Soru 144Soru

Consider the following business plan argument:

A commercial bakery plans to replace standard white flour with a newly developed high-fiber wheat flour across all its bread product lines. The bakery's management reasons that because health-conscious consumers are willing to pay a 25% premium for high-fiber products, making this change will significantly boost the company's net profits over the coming year.

Match each evaluation question regarding the argument's validity on the left with the correct variance analysis outcome on the right.

Soldaki öğeye tıklayın, sonra eşleşen sağdaki öğeye tıklayın

Öğeler

Whether the unit cost of sourcing high-fiber flour substantially exceeds the cost of standard white flour.
Whether traditional bread buyers will reduce their total purchase volume due to the altered taste and texture of high-fiber bread.
Whether rival regional bakeries already offer high-fiber bread at standard non-premium pricing.

Eşleşmeler

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap

Each evaluation question is paired with its Test of Variance outcomes: flour sourcing costs determine whether profit margins widen or shrink based on expense structure; traditional buyer volume response determines whether unit price increases compensate for lost volume; competitor pricing determines market willingness to accept a price premium.
The correct pairings accurately demonstrate the Test of Variance for Critical Reasoning argument evaluation. Each question on the left introduces a critical factor (sourcing costs, consumer purchasing volume, competitive pricing), and the corresponding match on the right illustrates how extreme YES/NO answers to that question shift the argument between being strengthened and being weakened.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the central conclusion and key premises of the argument.
Conclusion: Replacing standard flour with high-fiber flour will significantly boost net profits. Premises: Consumers pay a 25% premium for high-fiber products.
Evaluating validity requires determining what missing factors could cause the conclusion to hold or fail.
2
Apply the Test of Variance to each proposed evaluation question by testing extreme opposite answers (YES vs. NO).
For flour cost (left_1): High cost (YES) reduces margins, low cost (NO) preserves gains. Matches cost outcome (right_2). For buyer behavior (left_2): Volume drop (YES) negates unit price gain, volume retention (NO) yields full profit. Matches volume outcome (right_1). For competitor pricing (left_3): Cheaper rivals (YES) block premium pricing, no rivals (NO) allows premium pricing. Matches competition outcome (right_3).
The Test of Variance proves an evaluation factor is valid when opposite answers produce opposing effects on the argument's conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Argument Validity and Test of Variance
Soru 145Soru

A wildlife conservation agency plans to introduce a native predatory bird, the peregrine falcon, into a coastal metropolitan area to control the rapidly growing population of feral pigeons. Conservationists argue that because feral pigeons make up over 80 percent of the falcon's natural diet in comparable habitats, this introduction will significantly reduce the city's pigeon population without threatening indigenous songbird species.

Which of the following questions would be most useful to evaluate the validity of the conservationists' argument?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: Whether feral pigeons in the metropolitan area nest predominantly in architectural niches that prevent hunting falcons from capturing them.

Cevap

Evaluating whether feral pigeons nest in architectural niches inaccessible to falcons is most useful because it directly tests the feasibility of falcon predation on pigeons versus songbirds.
The correct answer provides a critical factor whose two extreme outcomes produce opposite effects on the argument. If urban architecture protects pigeons from falcon attacks, falcons will fail to suppress pigeon numbers and may switch to preying on local songbirds, invalidating the argument. Conversely, if architecture does not hinder falcons, they can prey on pigeons as expected, validating the argument.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument structure.
Premise: Pigeons make up over 80% of falcons' diet in comparable habitats. Conclusion: Introducing falcons will reduce urban pigeon populations without threatening native songbirds.
Identifying the logic gap between dietary preferences in natural habitats and hunting outcomes in an urban environment.
2
Apply the Test of Variance to the potential evaluation questions.
Testing extreme 'Yes' and 'No' answers to the option regarding inaccessible nesting niches reveals opposite impacts on the conclusion.
If pigeons are inaccessible, falcons cannot prey on them and may prey on songbirds instead; if pigeons are accessible, the plan works as intended.

Anahtar Kavram

Test of Variance for Argument Validity
Soru 146Soru

To reduce the severity of summer wildfires, a municipal forestry board plans to replace mechanical brush-clearing with controlled goat grazing along park perimeters. Mechanical clearing leaves behind dry, shredded plant residue that remains combustible on the forest floor for several months. In contrast, goats consume underbrush completely, eliminating ground residue. The board concludes that substituting goat grazing for mechanical clearing will significantly decrease the overall intensity of wildfires in these perimeters during the dry season.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the forestry board's argument depends?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The goats used for controlled grazing will not preferentially avoid the most flammable shrub species in favor of fire-resistant vegetation.

Cevap

The argument assumes that the goats will not selectively avoid consuming the specific shrub species that contribute most to fire intensity.
The conclusion asserts that replacing mechanical clearing with goat grazing will decrease wildfire intensity because goats consume underbrush without leaving flammable ground residue. For this plan to succeed, the goats must actually eat the vegetation that creates the high fire risk. If the goats preferentially avoid the most flammable plants, those hazardous fuels will remain in the forest perimeter, rendering goat grazing ineffective at reducing fire intensity. Therefore, the argument depends on the assumption that goats will not selectively bypass the most flammable plants.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument structure
Premise 1: Mechanical clearing leaves combustible shredded residue. Premise 2: Goats consume underbrush completely without leaving ground residue. Conclusion: Goat grazing will significantly decrease overall wildfire intensity compared to mechanical clearing.
Identifying premises and conclusion exposes the logical leap between total plant consumption and effective fire mitigation.
2
Identify the logical gap
The author assumes that goat grazing effectively removes the key combustible vegetation without introducing new vulnerabilities (such as leaving highly flammable plant species untouched).
The conclusion relies on the physical reduction of wildfire fuel.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the correct option
Negated statement: Goats WILL preferentially avoid the most flammable shrub species and consume fire-resistant vegetation instead. If true, the primary fire hazards remain standing, which destroys the conclusion that fire intensity will decrease.
A valid unstated assumption must be essential; its negation shatters the author's reasoning.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Unstated Assumptions via the Negation Test
Soru 147Soru

A commercial vertical farm located in a high-latitude urban center plans to reduce its energy overhead by replacing half of its indoor electric LED grow lights with a passive fiber-optic system that collects natural sunlight via rooftop lenses and pipes it into cultivate chambers. Management contends that because electricity consumed by artificial lighting accounts for over sixty percent of the farm's monthly operating expenditures, implementing this solar piping system will significantly decrease total monthly operating expenses. Which of the following is an assumption on which management's argument depends?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The maintenance and operating costs associated with the rooftop tracking lenses will not equal or exceed the monetary savings generated from lower electricity usage.

Cevap

The argument depends on the assumption that the costs required to operate and maintain the new rooftop collection system will not outweigh or negate the financial savings achieved from reduced electricity consumption.
Management concludes that total monthly operating expenses will fall because electricity usage drops. For a reduction in one specific expense (electricity) to lead to a net reduction in total operating expenses, the replacement technology must not incur new secondary operating expenses (such as maintenance for rooftop collectors) that equal or outweigh the savings. Applying the Negation Test confirms this: if maintenance costs do meet or exceed electricity savings, total monthly operating expenses will not decrease.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the argument structure
Premise: LED lighting accounts for over 60% of monthly operating expenses. Premise: Replacing half the LEDs with a passive fiber-optic sunlight system reduces electricity usage. Conclusion: Implementing the system will significantly decrease overall monthly operating expenses.
Deconstructing the argument isolates the leap from electricity savings to total operational expense reduction.
2
Identify potential logical gaps
The argument assumes that saving money on electricity will translate into overall operational savings without introducing new costs that negate those savings.
An unstated necessary assumption must bridge the gap between electricity savings and total cost reduction.
3
Apply the Negation Test to candidate statements
Negating the statement regarding system maintenance yields: 'The maintenance and operating costs of the rooftop tracking lenses WILL equal or exceed the monetary savings generated from lower electricity usage.'
If the negated version shatters the conclusion, the original statement is a strictly necessary assumption.
4
Evaluate the impact of the negated statement on the conclusion
If maintenance expenses equal or exceed the electricity savings, total monthly operating expenses will not fall. The argument collapses.
This confirms that the option concerning maintenance costs is a required unstated assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Unstated Assumptions
Soru 148Soru

A municipal transit authority plans to replace station ticket window personnel with automated self-service kiosks in order to reduce station operating expenses. The authority claims that because automated kiosks eliminate the need to pay hourly wages to human ticket agents, implementing this system will successfully decrease the total monthly operational costs of running the transit stations. Which of the following is an assumption on which the transit authority's argument depends?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The ongoing maintenance and operational costs of the automated kiosks will not equal or exceed the payroll savings gained from removing ticket window personnel.

Cevap

The argument assumes that the ongoing maintenance and operational costs of the automated kiosks will not equal or exceed the payroll savings gained from removing ticket window personnel.
The conclusion asserts that replacing human ticket agents with automated kiosks will lower overall station operating expenses. This relies on the implicit premise that the new expense (kiosk maintenance and operation) will be smaller than the eliminated expense (agent wages). Negating this option—assuming kiosk maintenance costs equal or exceed wage savings—shatters the conclusion that overall costs will fall.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and premise
Premise: Automated kiosks eliminate wage expenses for ticket agents. Conclusion: Implementing kiosks will reduce overall station operating expenses.
Understanding the logical jump between removing wage expenses and achieving total cost reduction reveals the necessary assumption.
2
Apply the Negation Test to the candidate assumption
Negating the statement gives: 'The maintenance and operational costs of kiosks WILL equal or exceed the saved payroll expenses.'
If negated costs match or outweigh savings, overall station operating expenses will not drop, causing the argument to fail.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Unstated Assumptions (Negation Test)
Soru 149Soru

A municipal agricultural board analyzed crop yields across farms in Region K over the past five years. The board observed that farms using Organic Soil Treatment X produced 20 percent higher crop yields on average than farms using standard synthetic fertilizers. Based on this observation, the board concluded that adopting Organic Soil Treatment X increases agricultural productivity. Consequently, the board recommended that all farms in Region K switch to Organic Soil Treatment X to boost overall regional crop output.

True or False: The argument's reasoning is vulnerable to criticism because it assumes that the higher crop yields observed on farms using Organic Soil Treatment X were caused by the treatment itself, rather than by other pre-existing differences between those farms and farms using synthetic fertilizers.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True
The argument commits a classic correlation-versus-causation error. The author concludes that Organic Soil Treatment X causes higher productivity based solely on an observed association in data, ignoring the possibility that farms opting for Treatment X had superior soil quality, better equipment, or higher investment to begin with.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and evidence in the passage.
Evidence: Farms using Organic Soil Treatment X had 20 percent higher average yields than farms using synthetic fertilizers. Conclusion: Treatment X causes increased productivity, so all regional farms should switch to Treatment X.
Understanding the argument structure is essential for uncovering its underlying logic and vulnerabilities.
2
Evaluate the logical gap between the evidence and conclusion.
The author infers a direct causal link from a mere statistical correlation between the treatment and crop yields.
Observational data does not rule out confounding factors such as superior baseline soil quality, irrigation resources, or farmer expertise on farms that chose Treatment X.
3
Assess the truth value of the evaluated statement.
The statement accurately identifies that the argument fails to account for pre-existing differences between the farm groups.
Since the statement correctly describes the primary reasoning vulnerability of the argument, the evaluation is True.

Anahtar Kavram

Correlation vs. Causation & Confounding Variables
Soru 150Soru

Consider the following argument: A regional art museum recently replaced all single-use plastic water bottles in its cafeteria with reusable glass bottles. Museum administrators claim that this policy will significantly reduce the cafeteria's overall carbon footprint over the coming year. Evaluate the following statement: The argument depends on the assumption that the energy consumed in manufacturing and repeatedly washing the reusable glass bottles does not produce greenhouse gas emissions that equal or exceed the emissions saved by eliminating the single-use plastic bottles.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True
The statement accurately expresses a necessary unstated assumption of the argument. If the emissions involved in creating and repeatedly cleaning the glass bottles were equal to or higher than those generated by single-use plastic bottles, switching to glass would fail to reduce the carbon footprint, undermining the administrators' claim.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument into its core premise and conclusion.
Premise: The museum replaced single-use plastic bottles with reusable glass bottles. Conclusion: The policy will significantly lower the cafeteria's carbon footprint.
Identifying the gap between the premise and conclusion reveals what must be assumed for the conclusion to be valid.
2
Apply the Negation Test to the statement.
Negated Statement: The energy consumed in producing and washing glass bottles DOES produce emissions equal to or greater than the emissions saved from eliminating plastic bottles.
If the logical negation of a statement invalidates the argument's conclusion, that statement is a necessary unstated assumption.
3
Evaluate the impact of the negated statement on the conclusion.
If glass bottle lifecycle emissions equal or exceed plastic bottle emissions, the conclusion that the carbon footprint will decrease is destroyed.
Because negating the statement breaks the argument, the statement is a required unstated assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Unstated Assumptions via the Negation Test
Soru 151Soru

A regional healthcare network analyzed performance data from its twenty member hospitals over a two-year period. The network found that the five hospitals that voluntarily installed automated self-service check-in kiosks experienced a 20 percent decrease in average emergency room wait times. Based on this observation, the executive board concluded that installing these kiosks across the remaining fifteen hospitals will lead to a comparable decrease in patient wait times across the entire network.

The executive board's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: fails to account for the possibility that the hospitals that voluntarily installed the kiosks possessed other structural or administrative advantages that contributed to the shorter wait times.

Cevap

The argument is vulnerable because it fails to consider that hospitals voluntarily adopting self-service kiosks may have had other preexisting operational efficiencies that led to reduced wait times.
The correct answer identifies a classic self-selection flaw. Because the five hospitals voluntarily chose to install the kiosks, they may differ systematically from the remaining fifteen hospitals—for example, possessing better administrative workflow, updated triage software, or more flexible staffing. Thus, the observed reduction in wait times cannot be definitively attributed solely to the kiosks, nor can one guarantee identical results when mandating kiosks across non-adopting facilities.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's premise and conclusion.
Premise: Five hospitals that voluntarily installed check-in kiosks saw a 20% drop in wait times. Conclusion: Installing kiosks in the remaining fifteen hospitals will cause a similar drop in wait times.
Understanding the gap between premise data and executive conclusion is essential to finding the flaw.
2
Evaluate the leap in logic for sampling bias or confounding variables.
The five initial hospitals voluntarily chose to adopt kiosks, suggesting they might be better managed, more technologically integrated, or less crowded than the non-adopting hospitals.
Assuming that a result observed in a self-selected group will automatically replicate in a general population overlooks confounding differences.
3
Match the identified vulnerability to the option describing self-selection bias.
The correct response accurately states that voluntary adopters might possess other advantages responsible for shorter wait times.
This directly undermines the board's assumption that kiosks alone caused the reduced wait times and will produce identical results elsewhere.

Anahtar Kavram

Confounding Variables and Self-Selection Bias in Inductive Generalization
Soru 152Soru

An international airline recently decided to replace heavy printed inflight magazines with digital versions accessible via passengers' personal mobile devices. Management claims that removing the printed magazines will significantly reduce the aircraft's weight and overall fuel consumption during flights. Therefore, management concludes that the airline's total operating expenses will decrease starting next month. Which of the following is an assumption on which the management's conclusion depends?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The operational costs required to provide and maintain the digital magazine platform will be less than the monetary savings achieved from reduced fuel consumption.

Cevap

The operational costs required to provide and maintain the digital magazine platform will be less than the monetary savings achieved from reduced fuel consumption.
The conclusion asserts that total operating expenses will decline because fuel consumption drops. For a net decrease in total expenses to occur, the new expenses created by switching to digital magazines must not exceed the savings in fuel costs. If digital platform maintenance costs more than the saved fuel money, total operating expenses would actually rise or stay equal, completely undermining the conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.
Premises: Removing printed magazines reduces weight and fuel consumption. Conclusion: Total operating expenses will decrease starting next month.
Understanding the logical bridge between fuel savings and net expense reduction is essential to identifying the logical gap.
2
Identify the unstated logical gap.
The argument assumes that saving money on fuel will not be offset by new costs associated with the digital alternative.
Lowering one expense line item does not guarantee lower total expenses if a new expense is higher than the savings.
3
Apply the Negation Test to verify the assumption.
If digital platform costs are equal to or greater than fuel savings, total operating expenses will not decrease, causing the conclusion to fall apart.
A necessary assumption must shatter the conclusion when logically negated.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Unstated Assumptions via Negation Test
Soru 153Soru

Consider the following argument: A regional courier company plans to replace its gasoline-powered delivery vans with electric vehicles in order to lower its annual fuel expenditures. The company's director claims that making this fleet replacement will increase the company's net annual profit.

True or False: The director's argument depends on the unstated assumption that the cost savings from lower fuel expenditures will not be exceeded by the costs of acquiring and maintaining the electric vehicles.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True. The argument assumes that the reduction in fuel expenses will not be negated or outweighed by the new expenses associated with electric vehicles.
The conclusion asserts a net financial gain based on reducing a single cost category (fuel). For net profit to increase, total financial benefits must outweigh total costs. If the secondary costs of electric vehicle adoption outweigh the fuel savings, the conclusion breaks down. Hence, assuming those secondary costs will not exceed fuel savings is logically necessary.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the premise and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Replacing gasoline vans with electric vehicles lowers annual fuel expenditures. Conclusion: The fleet replacement will increase net annual profit.
Understanding the logical jump between premise and conclusion highlights the underlying assumption.
2
Apply the Negation Test to the evaluated claim.
Negated statement: The cost savings from lower fuel expenditures WILL be exceeded by the costs of acquiring and maintaining the electric vehicles.
Logical negation tests whether an assumption is strictly required for the conclusion to stand.
3
Evaluate the impact of the negated statement on the conclusion.
If additional vehicle costs exceed fuel savings, net annual profit will decrease instead of increasing. The conclusion collapses.
Because the negated statement destroys the argument's conclusion, the original statement is a necessary unstated assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Unstated Assumptions (Negation Test)
Soru 154Soru

The municipal electric utility of a small district recently announced a plan to replace its natural gas electricity supply with solar power. The utility directors argue that because generating electricity from solar power currently costs significantly less per megawatt-hour than generating it from natural gas, adopting solar power will reduce the total monthly electricity bills of local residents. Which of the following is an assumption on which the utility directors' argument depends?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The additional expenses required to transmit and integrate solar energy into the local power grid will not exceed the savings gained from lower generation costs.

Cevap

The argument depends on the assumption that additional expenses to transmit and integrate solar energy into the local power grid will not exceed the savings gained from lower generation costs.
The argument moves from a premise about lower generation costs to a conclusion about lower overall monthly bills. For this conclusion to hold, other non-generation expenses associated with adopting solar power—such as grid transmission and integration—must not exceed the money saved on generation. Negating this statement directly invalidates the author's conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Generating solar power costs less per megawatt-hour than natural gas. Conclusion: Switching to solar power will reduce total monthly electricity bills.
Understanding the logical jump between lower generation cost and lower overall bills is essential for identifying unstated assumptions.
2
Identify potential gaps between the premise and conclusion.
The argument assumes generation cost is the only relevant factor determining final electricity bills.
If secondary costs (such as grid integration or transmission) outweigh generation savings, total costs will increase.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the correct choice.
Negating the option gives: 'Additional transmission and integration costs WILL exceed the savings.' This completely shatters the conclusion that overall bills will be reduced.
A valid assumption must collapse the conclusion when logically negated.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Unstated Assumptions using the Negation Test
Tahmini Süre:1m 0s
Soru 155Soru

Passage: A commercial airline recently observed that flight routes equipped with newly upgraded in-flight entertainment systems recorded a 15 percent higher passenger satisfaction rating over a six-month trial period than routes retaining standard systems. The airline's management concluded that installing these upgraded entertainment systems was the direct cause of the higher passenger satisfaction, and therefore ordered the immediate installation of the systems across all remaining aircraft to boost overall customer approval.

Statement: The management's argument is vulnerable to criticism because it assumes that an observed correlation between upgraded entertainment systems and higher passenger satisfaction proves a direct causal relationship, without ruling out alternative explanations for the higher ratings on those specific routes.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

The statement is True. The argument flawedly assumes that correlation implies causation by claiming the entertainment systems directly caused higher satisfaction ratings without accounting for potential confounding factors on the tested routes.
The statement correctly characterizes the core logical vulnerability of the argument. Management observed a statistical association between upgraded entertainment systems and elevated satisfaction ratings, then immediately concluded that the systems produced the increase. By failing to demonstrate that the trial routes did not differ in other significant ways (such as flight duration, crew performance, or arrival timeliness), the argument improperly equates correlation with direct causation.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the Premise and Conclusion of the passage
Premise: Routes with new entertainment systems had 15% higher passenger satisfaction ratings than routes without them. Conclusion: The new entertainment systems were the direct cause of the higher passenger satisfaction.
Deconstructing the argument reveals that the conclusion hinges entirely on a causal claim derived from observational correlation data.
2
Identify the logical flaw in the reasoning
The argument commits a causal flaw by assuming that because the new systems and high ratings co-occurred, the systems must have caused the high ratings, ignoring alternative factors (e.g., flight schedules, aircraft condition, service quality).
In GMAT Critical Reasoning, inferring direct causation from correlation without eliminating confounding variables is a classic logical flaw.
3
Evaluate the accuracy of the given Statement
The statement correctly asserts that the argument assumes correlation proves causation without ruling out alternative explanations.
Since the statement accurately describes the argument's specific vulnerability, the correct response is True.

Anahtar Kavram

Confusing Correlation with Causation
Soru 156Soru

A municipal water authority recently installed smart digital water meters across a high-income residential neighborhood in District North. Over the six months following the installation, average monthly household water consumption in District North declined by 12 percent compared to the preceding year. Satisfied with these results, the authority's director concluded that installing smart digital water meters across all municipal districts will lead to a citywide reduction in household water usage. Which of the following points to a flaw in the director's reasoning?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: It presumes that findings from a sample drawn from a specific demographic neighborhood can be generalized to all municipal districts.

Cevap

The argument incorrectly assumes that results obtained from a single, high-income residential neighborhood are representative of all municipal districts across the city.
The correct choice highlights the flaw in inductive generalization. The argument bases its broad citywide prediction on evidence collected from a single neighborhood characterized by specific socioeconomic conditions (high-income). Because District North is not representative of all municipal districts, the conclusion that all districts will experience a similar reduction is unwarranted.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main premise and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Installing digital meters in District North (a high-income neighborhood) led to a 12% decline in household water usage over six months. Conclusion: Installing digital meters in all municipal districts will lead to a citywide reduction in household water usage.
Understanding the logical jump from premise to conclusion reveals where the reasoning is vulnerable.
2
Analyze the gap between the sample and the population.
The sample consists strictly of households in District North, specified as a high-income neighborhood. The conclusion generalizes this effect to all municipal districts citywide.
High-income households may respond differently to technology or pricing feedback than households in lower-income or commercial districts.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find the one that accurately describes this sampling flaw.
The option stating that the argument presumes findings from a specific demographic neighborhood can be generalized to all municipal districts accurately identifies the unrepresentative sample flaw.
Generalizing from a unrepresentative subgroup to a broader population is a classic inductive reasoning flaw.

Anahtar Kavram

Unrepresentative Sample / Sampling Bias Flaw
Soru 157Soru

A specialty pharmaceutical company plans to transition the synthesis of its primary active ingredient from traditional batch processing to continuous flow manufacturing. Management claims that this operational shift will lower the overall production cost per unit by at least 20 percent. This claim is grounded in the observation that continuous flow processing completely eliminates the multi-day downtime currently required between batches for vessel sterilisation and quality re-validation.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the management's argument depends?

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: The expenses involved in maintaining continuous flow equipment will not equal or exceed the cost savings gained from eliminating vessel sterilisation and re-validation downtime.

Cevap

The argument relies on the assumption that the expenses involved in maintaining continuous flow equipment will not equal or exceed the cost savings gained from eliminating sterilisation and re-validation downtime.
The author concludes that transitioning to continuous flow manufacturing will reduce unit production costs by at least 20 percent based on eliminating cleaning and re-validation downtime. For this conclusion to hold, the financial benefit of eliminating downtime must not be neutralized by new costs inherent to continuous flow manufacturing. If maintenance or operational expenses specific to continuous flow equipment equal or exceed the savings gained from eliminating downtime, the overall cost per unit will not fall by 20 percent. Therefore, the assumption that continuous flow maintenance costs will not offset downtime savings is necessary for the conclusion to stand.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the premise and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: Continuous flow manufacturing eliminates multi-day downtime needed for vessel cleaning and re-validation between batches. Conclusion: Transitioning to continuous flow manufacturing will reduce overall unit production costs by at least 20 percent.
Deconstructing the argument isolates the evidence from the primary claim.
2
Identify the logical leap between premise and conclusion.
The argument assumes that eliminating downtime savings directly translates to net cost reductions without introducing offsetting expenses.
Gross savings in one operational area only yield net savings if new costs elsewhere do not absorb those savings.
3
Apply the Negation Test to evaluate candidate assumptions.
Negating the statement regarding maintenance costs reveals that if continuous flow maintenance costs equal or exceed downtime savings, unit costs cannot drop by 20 percent. The argument collapses.
A required assumption must shatter the conclusion when logically negated.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying unstated necessary assumptions in GMAT Critical Reasoning using the Negation Test.
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Soru 158Soru

Consider the following argument: A deep-sea oceanographic research institute plans to replace its fleet of battery-powered autonomous gliders with thermal-gradient gliders for long-term polar climate monitoring. The battery-powered gliders require frequent, expensive ship-based retrieval trips to replace depleted batteries. Because thermal-gradient gliders harvest energy from oceanic temperature differences, they can remain deployed indefinitely, thereby eliminating retrieval trips. The institute concludes that this transition will significantly lower its total operating cost per oceanographic data point collected over a five-year period.

Statement: For the institute's conclusion to hold, it must be assumed that the capital and maintenance costs unique to operating thermal-gradient gliders over five years will not exceed the financial savings achieved by eliminating ship-based battery replacement trips.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True. The claim represents a necessary unstated assumption because if the unique capital and maintenance costs of thermal-gradient gliders exceed the savings from eliminated ship trips, the overall operating cost per data point over five years will not decrease.
The statement is correct (True) because an argument concluding that overall cost will decrease after eliminating one expense implicitly relies on the assumption that no new expenses equal to or greater than the savings will be introduced. Applying the Negation Test confirms that if new costs exceed saved costs, the conclusion fails.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the core argument components.
Premise: Battery replacement requires costly ship trips. Premise: Thermal gliders eliminate ship trips by harvesting oceanic energy. Conclusion: Transitioning to thermal gliders will reduce total operating cost per data point over five years.
Isolating the premise-to-conclusion link clarifies the gap between eliminating one specific expense and reducing overall cost.
2
Identify the logical shift or gap.
The premises show a reduction in ship retrieval expenses, but the conclusion makes a broad claim about total operating cost over a five-year timeframe.
Total cost includes all expenses (capital acquisition, maintenance, payload integration), not just retrieval logistics.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the statement.
Negated statement: The capital and maintenance costs unique to thermal-gradient gliders DO exceed the savings from eliminating ship trips.
Testing the logical contradiction determines whether the assumption is strictly necessary.
4
Evaluate the impact of the negated statement on the conclusion.
If extra equipment costs outweigh retrieval savings, the total operating cost per data point will increase or stay equal, completely invalidating the institute's conclusion.
Since negating the statement breaks the argument, the statement is a required unstated assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Unstated Assumptions via the Negation Test
Soru 159Soru

Consider the following argument: An agricultural technology firm has developed a novel bio-inoculant containing engineered rhizobacteria designed to increase wheat root depth, thereby improving crop drought tolerance. Field trials conducted exclusively in sandy loam soils demonstrated a 25 percent increase in wheat grain yields under severe drought conditions. Based on these trial results, the firm concludes that commercial application of this bio-inoculant across all major wheat-growing regions will reliably protect wheat yields against severe droughts.

Statement: The argument relies on the unstated assumption that the rhizobacteria bio-inoculant will achieve similar root-depth enhancements in non-sandy soil types typical of other major wheat-growing regions.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True. The argument assumes that the performance demonstrated in sandy loam soil during field trials will translate to non-sandy soil types found across other wheat-growing regions.
The argument bases its broad prediction about all major wheat-growing regions on field trials conducted solely in sandy loam soils. To logically connect this specific evidence to the overall conclusion, the author must assume that the bio-inoculant's effectiveness is not restricted to sandy loam soils. Applying the Negation Test demonstrates this dependency: if the bio-inoculant does not enhance root depth in non-sandy soil types, widespread commercial application across all regions cannot reliably protect yields, thereby invalidating the argument.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument into premise and conclusion.
Premise: Field trials in sandy loam soils showed a 25% yield increase under severe drought conditions using the bio-inoculant. Conclusion: Commercial application across all major wheat-growing regions will reliably protect wheat yields against severe droughts.
Separating the specific evidence from the broad claim highlights the logical gap between the trial conditions and the global target market.
2
Identify the scope shift between the premise and conclusion.
The premise is restricted to 'sandy loam soils', whereas the conclusion extends to 'all major wheat-growing regions', which contain diverse non-sandy soil compositions.
A necessary assumption must bridge the gap between the tested soil environment and untested soil environments.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the evaluated statement.
Negated Statement: The bio-inoculant will NOT achieve similar root-depth enhancements in non-sandy soil types typical of other major wheat-growing regions. If this negated claim is true, the broad commercial deployment will fail in regions with non-sandy soil, directly invalidating the conclusion that yields will be reliably protected across all major regions.
Because negating the statement destroys the argument's conclusion, the statement is a required unstated assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Necessary Unstated Assumptions via the Negation Test
Soru 160Soru

Consider the following argument: Urban atmospheric pollution accelerates the decay of historic stained-glass windows through chemical corrosion. To protect a landmark cathedral's 14th-century windows, conservators propose installing protective secondary glazing panels on the exterior facade. Because these panels block airborne sulfur compounds and regulate surface humidity, conservators conclude that this intervention will significantly decrease the overall rate of deterioration experienced by the historic glass over the next decade.

True or False: The argument relies on the unstated assumption that the physical installation of the secondary glazing panels will not introduce mechanical damage or structural strain to the historic glass that offsets the reduction in chemical deterioration.

Cevabı ve açıklamayı göster

Cevap: True

Cevap

True. The argument depends on the unstated assumption that the installation process will not introduce mechanical damage that offsets the chemical protection gained.
The author concludes that installing secondary glazing will cause a net decrease in overall glass deterioration based solely on evidence that the panels reduce chemical corrosion. For a net decrease to occur, any negative side-effects resulting from the intervention—such as mechanical damage during installation—must not equal or exceed the chemical damage prevented. Applying the Negation Test confirms that if installation damage offsets the chemical protection, the conclusion fails. Thus, the statement represents a necessary unstated assumption.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's premise and conclusion.
Premise: Secondary glazing panels block sulfur compounds and regulate humidity, preventing chemical corrosion. Conclusion: Installing the panels will significantly decrease the overall deterioration rate of the historic glass.
Analyzing the scope shift from a specific benefit (chemical protection) to an overall outcome (total deterioration rate) exposes unstated gaps in the logic.
2
Evaluate potential side-effects or implementation gaps.
The argument assumes that achieving the specific chemical benefit will translate directly into a net reduction in overall damage.
If implementing a plan introduces new damage, the net benefit claimed by the conclusion may not be realized.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the statement.
Negated statement: The physical installation WILL introduce mechanical damage or structural strain that offsets the reduction in chemical deterioration. Outcome: The conclusion that overall deterioration will significantly decrease is completely undermined.
A statement whose logical negation invalidates the main conclusion is a necessary unstated assumption of the argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Negation Test for Necessary Assumptions
ÖncekiSayfa 8 / 9Sonraki
Critical Reasoning: Argument Evaluation Alıştırma Soruları — GMAT — Sayfa 8 | Examkin