AWA Critical Thinking & Argument Analysis 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A survey of 50 customers shows 80% prefer Product X. The company concludes all customers prefer Product X. What flaw does this reasoning contain?
- The sample size is too small and may not represent all customers (Correct answer)
- Survey questions are always biased
- Eighty percent is not a meaningful majority
- Customer preferences are irrelevant to product quality
Correct answer: The sample size is too small and may not represent all customers
Drawing a universal conclusion from a small, potentially unrepresentative sample is a hasty generalization.
Question 2: Which strategy is most effective when the AWA prompt asks you to analyze an argument's logical structure?
- Identify the conclusion, premises, assumptions, and then evaluate each for logical gaps (Correct answer)
- Agree with the argument and provide personal supporting examples
- Restate the argument in your own words without critique
- Focus exclusively on grammar and word choice in the original argument
Correct answer: Identify the conclusion, premises, assumptions, and then evaluate each for logical gaps
A systematic breakdown of conclusion, premises, and assumptions is the foundation of a strong AWA argument analysis essay.
Question 3: An executive argues: 'Our best-selling product was designed by Team A, so Team A should lead all future projects.' What flawed reasoning is present?
- Generalizing from one success to universal superiority without considering other factors (Correct answer)
- Using circular reasoning by defining success through team assignment
- Committing an appeal to authority by citing the executive's own opinion
- Creating a false analogy between different product types
Correct answer: Generalizing from one success to universal superiority without considering other factors
One success does not prove Team A will outperform in all contexts; market conditions, product type, and luck may have contributed.
Question 4: In a well-constructed AWA critique, what is the primary purpose of proposing what additional evidence would strengthen an argument?
- To demonstrate you understand what evidence would address the argument's logical gaps (Correct answer)
- To rewrite the argument from scratch with a stronger claim
- To show sympathy for the author's position
- To provide your personal opinion on the topic
Correct answer: To demonstrate you understand what evidence would address the argument's logical gaps
Suggesting strengthening evidence shows you can identify what is missing and articulate what would make the reasoning more sound.
Question 5: An argument states: 'Violent video games cause aggression because teenagers who play them are more aggressive.' What logical error is committed?
- Circular reasoning—the claim restates the premise without providing independent evidence (Correct answer)
- False analogy between virtual and real violence
- Ad hominem attack on video game developers
- Slippery slope predicting escalating violence
Correct answer: Circular reasoning—the claim restates the premise without providing independent evidence
The argument uses the observed aggression as both the evidence and the conclusion, which is circular.
Question 6: Which of the following is the strongest counterexample to the claim: 'Stricter gun laws always reduce gun violence'?
- A country with strict gun laws that has a higher gun violence rate than some countries with looser laws (Correct answer)
- A study showing gun owners support some regulations
- A politician who supports strict laws and lives in a low-crime area
- Statistics showing most gun crimes involve illegally obtained firearms
Correct answer: A country with strict gun laws that has a higher gun violence rate than some countries with looser laws
A single clear counterexample—a country with strict laws but high violence—directly disproves the absolute claim 'always reduces.'
Question 7: When an AWA argument relies on an analogy (e.g., 'This worked in City A, so it will work in City B'), what is the key question to ask?
- Whether the two situations are similar enough in relevant ways for the comparison to hold (Correct answer)
- Whether City A is larger than City B
- Whether the same officials govern both cities
- Whether the argument uses statistics to support the analogy
Correct answer: Whether the two situations are similar enough in relevant ways for the comparison to hold
Analogies are only valid when the compared situations share the features that matter most for the outcome being predicted.
AWA Critical Thinking & Argument Analysis 4
A survey of 50 customers shows 80% prefer Product X.
The company concludes all customers prefer Product X.
What flaw does this reasoning contain?