AWA Critical Thinking & Argument Analysis 5 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A study finds that people who own pets live longer on average. A columnist concludes: 'Get a pet to live longer.' What is the most significant flaw?
- Healthier, more active people may be more likely to own pets, reversing the causal direction (Correct answer)
- The study did not specify which types of pets were studied
- Longevity data is notoriously difficult to collect
- The columnist has a financial interest in pet ownership
Correct answer: Healthier, more active people may be more likely to own pets, reversing the causal direction
Reverse causation is possible: healthier people may seek pets, not pets cause health—the argument mistakes correlation for causation.
Question 2: Which of the following best distinguishes a 'fact' from an 'inference' in argument analysis?
- A fact is directly observable or verifiable; an inference is a conclusion drawn from facts that goes beyond what is directly stated (Correct answer)
- A fact is stated by an expert; an inference is stated by a layperson
- A fact appears first in a passage; an inference appears at the end
- A fact uses numbers; an inference uses adjectives
Correct answer: A fact is directly observable or verifiable; an inference is a conclusion drawn from facts that goes beyond what is directly stated
Facts are empirically verifiable; inferences extend beyond the evidence and may or may not be valid.
Question 3: An argument claims that a school's test scores improved because the principal was replaced. Which question is most important to resolve before accepting this conclusion?
- Whether any other changes (curriculum, funding, teaching staff) occurred at the same time as the leadership change (Correct answer)
- Whether the new principal has advanced degrees
- Whether test scores are the best measure of school quality
- Whether the previous principal was dismissed or resigned
Correct answer: Whether any other changes (curriculum, funding, teaching staff) occurred at the same time as the leadership change
Without ruling out simultaneous changes, the argument cannot isolate the principal change as the causal factor.
Question 4: In AWA scoring, which element most distinguishes a score-6 essay from a score-4 essay in argument analysis?
- Insightful identification of multiple logical flaws with specific, well-developed reasoning (Correct answer)
- Correct grammar and spelling throughout the essay
- Agreement or disagreement with the argument's conclusion
- Use of sophisticated vocabulary and complex sentence structures
Correct answer: Insightful identification of multiple logical flaws with specific, well-developed reasoning
Score-6 essays demonstrate depth of critical analysis—identifying nuanced flaws and developing each point thoroughly—not merely surface correctness.
Question 5: An argument concludes that walking meetings increase creativity based on one executive's report. What type of evidence would most strengthen this argument?
- Controlled experiments comparing creativity output in walking vs. seated meetings across multiple organizations (Correct answer)
- Testimonials from other executives who enjoy walking
- A study showing exercise in general improves mood
- Company revenue data collected after walking meetings were introduced
Correct answer: Controlled experiments comparing creativity output in walking vs. seated meetings across multiple organizations
Controlled experiments with multiple organizations isolate the walking meeting variable and make the causal claim far more defensible.
Question 6: Which of the following is an example of an 'appeal to tradition' fallacy?
- 'We have always done it this way, so we should continue doing it this way.' (Correct answer)
- 'Nine out of ten experts recommend this approach.'
- 'If you disagree, you clearly don't understand the issue.'
- 'Either you support this policy or you don't care about the economy.'
Correct answer: 'We have always done it this way, so we should continue doing it this way.'
Appeal to tradition argues that something is correct or good simply because it has been done historically, ignoring whether it is actually optimal.
Question 7: An AWA argument ends with the recommendation: 'Therefore, the company should immediately double its marketing budget.' What must a strong critique address?
- Whether the evidence provided actually supports that doubling the budget specifically will produce the desired outcome (Correct answer)
- Whether marketing budgets are generally effective across all industries
- Whether the company's CEO approved the recommendation
- Whether the argument was written by a marketing professional
Correct answer: Whether the evidence provided actually supports that doubling the budget specifically will produce the desired outcome
A critique must evaluate whether the leap from evidence to the specific recommendation (doubling the budget) is logically justified.
AWA Critical Thinking & Argument Analysis 5
A study finds that people who own pets live longer on average.
A columnist concludes: 'Get a pet to live longer.' What is the most significant flaw?