GMAT Verbal: Boldface and Method of Reasoning 1 — Questions and Answers

Question 1: The following argument contains two portions in boldface: 'Many economists believe that raising the minimum wage significantly increases unemployment among low-wage workers. However, recent studies of regions that enacted large minimum wage increases found no significant rise in unemployment. Therefore, the concern about minimum wage increases causing unemployment is overstated.' The boldface portions play which roles in the argument?

The first is a conclusion the argument defends; the second is evidence offered in support of that conclusion
The first is a position the argument ultimately disputes; the second is the argument's main conclusion (Correct answer)
The first is evidence the argument accepts as true; the second is a secondary conclusion
The first and second are both intermediate conclusions supporting a broader claim

Correct answer: The first is a position the argument ultimately disputes; the second is the argument's main conclusion

The argument introduces the economists' belief (first boldface) as a position it will challenge. The 'however' signals the counterevidence. The second boldface is the conclusion the argument draws from that counterevidence.

Structure: (1) Established position [first boldface] → (2) Counterevidence ('recent studies found no rise') → (3) Conclusion [second boldface]. The first boldface is the position being challenged; the second is the main conclusion. B captures this accurately.

Question 2: The following argument contains two boldface portions: 'Organic produce contains lower pesticide residues than conventionally grown food. Some health advocates therefore recommend organic diets. However, the scientific evidence that current pesticide exposure levels from conventional produce cause harm to human health is weak.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second is evidence supporting that conclusion
The first is a premise the argument accepts; the second is a counterpoint that undermines the recommendation (Correct answer)
The first and second are both conclusions that the argument endorses
The first is a concession; the second introduces a new premise the argument plans to rebut

Correct answer: The first is a premise the argument accepts; the second is a counterpoint that undermines the recommendation

The first boldface is stated as true (accepted premise). The second boldface uses 'however' to challenge the recommendation — it is a counterclaim undermining the health-based recommendation.

First boldface = accepted fact (lower pesticide residues). Second boldface = counterpoint introduced by 'however' that weakens the recommendation. The argument structure: accepted fact → recommendation by others → BUT second boldface challenges the recommendation's basis. B is correct.

Question 3: Argument: 'Studies show that workers who exercise regularly report higher job satisfaction. Companies should therefore provide on-site fitness facilities. Regular exercise has well-documented mental health benefits.' The two boldface portions function as:

Both are premises supporting the conclusion that companies should provide fitness facilities (Correct answer)
The first is the conclusion; the second is additional support for that conclusion
The first is a premise; the second is a conclusion drawn from the premise
The first is evidence; the second is a counterargument the author will address

Correct answer: Both are premises supporting the conclusion that companies should provide fitness facilities

The conclusion (non-boldface) is that 'companies should provide fitness facilities.' Both boldface statements are premises supporting that recommendation: job satisfaction data + mental health benefits.

The argument's conclusion is the non-bold middle sentence: 'Companies should provide on-site fitness facilities.' Both boldface statements are evidence supporting this recommendation. A correctly identifies both as premises.

Question 4: An argument uses the following method of reasoning: 'Violent crime rates in Cityville dropped 25% in the year after the new police chief implemented community policing. Therefore, community policing reduces violent crime.' Which of the following uses the same method of reasoning?

Study participants who took Supplement Z showed higher energy levels. Therefore, Supplement Z increases energy. (Correct answer)
Since all cities that adopted community policing saw crime fall, Cityville's approach must be similarly effective.
If violent crime dropped because of community policing, then officer satisfaction scores should have improved.
Cityville's crime fell 25%, which is greater than the national average decline, proving the policy worked.

Correct answer: Study participants who took Supplement Z showed higher energy levels. Therefore, Supplement Z increases energy.

Both arguments follow the same pattern: an observed outcome follows an intervention, therefore the intervention caused the outcome (post hoc reasoning / temporal correlation implies causation).

The original argument: after community policing → crime dropped → therefore community policing caused it. This is a post hoc argument. Answer A follows the same pattern: after taking Supplement Z → higher energy → therefore Z caused it. B involves a different generalization pattern. C is a prediction test, not the same structure. D uses a comparison to a national average, different logic.

Question 5: Argument: 'Since the city introduced a plastic bag fee, the number of plastic bags used has declined 60%. This is evidence that economic incentives are effective tools for changing consumer behavior. The city should expand the fee to other single-use plastics.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is the main conclusion; the second is supporting evidence
The first is specific evidence; the second is a generalized conclusion drawn from that evidence (Correct answer)
Both boldface portions are conclusions of equal weight
The first is a premise and the second is a counterargument the author will rebut

Correct answer: The first is specific evidence; the second is a generalized conclusion drawn from that evidence

The first boldface is specific empirical evidence (60% decline). The second boldface is the broader conclusion drawn from that evidence (economic incentives change behavior). The final sentence then applies this conclusion.

First boldface = specific evidence (observed outcome of the bag fee). Second boldface = generalized conclusion drawn from this evidence (economic incentives work). B captures this evidence-to-conclusion flow. The final non-bold sentence is a recommendation applying the conclusion.

Question 6: Method of reasoning question: 'Every high-performing team in the study had a clear project lead. Team Delta is a high-performing team. Therefore, Team Delta has a clear project lead.' This argument uses which method of reasoning?

Analogy: applying findings from similar cases
Deductive reasoning: drawing a specific conclusion from general principles (Correct answer)
Inductive reasoning: generalizing from specific instances to a broad rule
Statistical inference: projecting population characteristics from sample data

Correct answer: Deductive reasoning: drawing a specific conclusion from general principles

This is a classic deductive syllogism: All high-performing teams have X (general rule) + Team Delta is high-performing (specific case) → Team Delta has X (specific conclusion). This is deductive.

Deductive arguments apply a general rule to a specific case to reach a certain conclusion (if the premises are true). Structure: All As are B. C is an A. Therefore C is B. This is textbook deduction. Inductive reasoning would generalize FROM examples.

Question 7: Boldface question: 'The merger between TechCorp and DataInc is expected to create the largest data analytics company in the industry. Critics argue this will harm competition. Historically, large merged entities in tech have frequently encountered regulatory scrutiny and been required to divest certain assets.' The two boldface statements function as:

The first is the main conclusion; the second is the author's counterargument to critics
The first is background context; the second is evidence supporting the critics' position (Correct answer)
The first is a premise; the second is a counterpoint the author will rebut
The first is the main conclusion; the second is the argument's primary evidence base

Correct answer: The first is background context; the second is evidence supporting the critics' position

The first boldface sets the scene (background fact about the merger). The second boldface provides historical evidence that bolsters the critics' argument that competition harm could lead to regulatory action.

First boldface = background/context (what the merger involves). Second boldface = historical evidence that supports the critics' concern about competition harm (regulatory scrutiny + divestitures have followed large mergers). B is correct.

Question 8: Method of reasoning: 'The novel by Author X received negative reviews from three major literary critics. Therefore, the novel is not worth reading.' The argument proceeds by:

Appealing to the consensus of a majority of readers
Using the judgment of expert authorities to support a conclusion about quality (Correct answer)
Showing that the novel fails to meet an established literary standard
Providing specific examples of the novel's weaknesses

Correct answer: Using the judgment of expert authorities to support a conclusion about quality

The argument cites the authority of major literary critics (experts) to support a quality judgment. This is an appeal to authority.

The argument does not cite the novel's content, reader feedback, or literary standards — it appeals to expert critics' judgments. This is a method of reasoning by authority. B accurately describes this.

Question 9: Boldface question: 'Some argue that social media algorithms cause political polarization by exposing users only to content matching their existing views. Research, however, shows that most users encounter a diverse range of political content in their feeds. Yet exposure to diverse content does not necessarily lead to more moderate views; heavy users may become more entrenched in their positions after encountering challenging perspectives.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first supports a conclusion the argument endorses; the second is a premise that supports the same conclusion
The first contradicts the polarization argument; the second limits the significance of the first's finding (Correct answer)
The first is the main conclusion; the second is a supporting premise
Both boldface portions support the argument that algorithms cause polarization

Correct answer: The first contradicts the polarization argument; the second limits the significance of the first's finding

First boldface: refutes the algorithm-based explanation (users do see diverse content). Second boldface: 'yet' signals a qualification — diverse exposure doesn't guarantee moderation, limiting the first's implication.

Structure: (1) Premise undermining algorithm argument [first boldface] → (2) But qualification [second boldface with 'yet'] → (3) So polarization may still occur. The first challenges the algorithm hypothesis; the second limits what the first actually proves. B is correct.

Question 10: Method of reasoning: 'Cities A, B, and C all implemented congestion pricing and saw a reduction in downtown traffic. Therefore, congestion pricing is an effective tool for reducing urban traffic.' This argument proceeds by:

Deductive logic from a universal law about urban economics
Inductive generalization from specific cases to a broad conclusion (Correct answer)
Analogy between city infrastructure and pricing mechanisms
Counter-example to challenge existing urban planning models

Correct answer: Inductive generalization from specific cases to a broad conclusion

The argument observes specific instances (three cities) and generalizes to a broad conclusion about congestion pricing. This is inductive reasoning.

Inductive reasoning moves from specific observations to general conclusions: 3 specific cities showed a result → therefore congestion pricing works in general. Deductive logic would start with a general rule. B is correct.

Question 11: Boldface question: 'Employee engagement scores at our company have fallen for three consecutive quarters. Management has proposed mandatory team-building retreats as a solution. Employee surveys indicate that low engagement is primarily driven by compensation concerns, not social disconnection.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first presents evidence of a problem; the second challenges the proposed solution by identifying the actual cause (Correct answer)
The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second provides supporting evidence
Both boldface portions support the retreat proposal
The first is a counterargument to the survey data; the second is the main conclusion

Correct answer: The first presents evidence of a problem; the second challenges the proposed solution by identifying the actual cause

First boldface: establishes that a problem exists (declining engagement). Second boldface: identifies the cause as compensation, which undermines the management's retreat-based solution that targets social disconnection.

The argument structure: Problem established [first boldface] → Solution proposed (retreats) → But: actual cause is different [second boldface], implying the solution addresses the wrong root cause. A is correct.

Question 12: Method of reasoning question: 'If interest rates rise, mortgage costs increase. If mortgage costs increase, fewer people can afford homes. Therefore, if interest rates rise, fewer people can afford homes.' This argument uses:

Inductive generalization from housing market data
Hypothetical syllogism: chaining conditional statements (Correct answer)
Analogy between interest rates and housing affordability
A reductio ad absurdum argument

Correct answer: Hypothetical syllogism: chaining conditional statements

This is a chain of conditional statements: If A then B; If B then C; Therefore if A then C. This is a hypothetical syllogism.

Structure: A→B, B→C, ∴A→C. This is a hypothetical syllogism — linking conditional statements in a chain. Deductive, precise, and logically valid if premises hold. B is correct.

Question 13: Boldface question: 'Our company's customer retention rate of 78% is below the industry average of 85%. To improve retention, the marketing team recommends doubling social media advertising. However, exit surveys show that customers leave primarily because of product quality issues, not lack of brand awareness.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is background context; the second is the argument's main conclusion recommending improved quality
The first establishes the problem; the second undermines the proposed solution by redirecting attention to the true cause (Correct answer)
Both boldface portions support the marketing team's recommendation
The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second provides evidence against a competing position

Correct answer: The first establishes the problem; the second undermines the proposed solution by redirecting attention to the true cause

First boldface: establishes the problem (retention gap). Second boldface: used after 'however' to challenge the marketing solution by pointing to product quality as the real driver — the proposed solution targets the wrong variable.

First boldface = problem evidence. The non-bold middle = proposed solution (social media ads). Second boldface = 'however' counterpoint showing the real cause (quality), implying ads won't fix it. B captures this accurately.

Question 14: Method of reasoning: 'Candidate Z's claim that our unemployment rate is at a historic high is wrong. Unemployment is at 4.2%, which is lower than the rates seen in 2008-2012.' The argument proceeds by:

Offering an emotional appeal to dismiss the candidate's credibility
Providing a specific counterexample that contradicts a general claim (Correct answer)
Showing that 4.2% unemployment is acceptable by international standards
Using historical analogy to predict future unemployment trends

Correct answer: Providing a specific counterexample that contradicts a general claim

The argument rebuts a general claim ('historic high') by citing specific factual evidence (4.2% is lower than 2008-2012 rates) — a direct counterexample.

The argument doesn't appeal to emotion, international standards, or analogy — it provides a specific data point and historical comparison that directly contradicts 'historic high.' This is a method of disproving by counterexample. B is correct.

Question 15: Boldface question: 'Online learning platforms have expanded access to high-quality education for millions worldwide. Critics argue that online learners show lower completion rates than in-person students. Completion rates, however, may reflect self-selection: those choosing online learning often juggle work and family obligations that make completion harder regardless of format.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is the main conclusion; the second contradicts it
The first is a positive claim about online learning; the second is the author's defense of online learning against the critics' concern (Correct answer)
Both boldface portions support the critics' position
The first is the critics' position; the second is the argument's main conclusion

Correct answer: The first is a positive claim about online learning; the second is the author's defense of online learning against the critics' concern

First boldface: positive claim supporting online learning. Second boldface: defends online learning against the completion rate criticism by offering an alternative explanation (self-selection). Together they support the argument's favorable view of online learning.

Both boldface portions support online learning. The first states its benefit (access expansion). The second rebuts the completion rate criticism by arguing the lower rates reflect demographic self-selection, not format quality. B is correct.

Question 16: An argument's method of reasoning: 'We should not change our current marketing strategy. It has worked well for the past five years, and there is no proven alternative that performs better.' This argument is best characterized as:

An appeal to novelty: newer strategies are assumed superior
An appeal to tradition and absence of evidence for alternatives (Correct answer)
A deductive proof that the current strategy is optimal
An inductive generalization from the strategy's past performance to future markets

Correct answer: An appeal to tradition and absence of evidence for alternatives

The argument defends the status quo using two related moves: the strategy has worked (appeal to tradition/past success) and no proven alternative exists (absence of evidence for change). B captures both.

The argument relies on: (1) the strategy's historical success (conservative, tradition-based reasoning) and (2) lack of a proven alternative (absence of evidence for change). This is a defense of the status quo, not a deductive proof or inductive generalization in the technical sense. B is correct.

Question 17: Boldface question: 'Research has shown that cities with higher public transit ridership have lower per-capita carbon emissions. City Manager Williams proposes expanding the subway system to reduce emissions. This correlation, however, may exist because low-emission cities tend to have denser urban cores, which independently promote both transit use and lower driving.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is the main conclusion; the second provides evidence supporting it
The first is evidence for a proposal; the second questions whether the proposed cause-and-effect relationship holds (Correct answer)
The first and second are both premises supporting the transit expansion proposal
The first is a fact the argument accepts; the second is the argument's ultimate conclusion

Correct answer: The first is evidence for a proposal; the second questions whether the proposed cause-and-effect relationship holds

First boldface: the empirical evidence cited in support of transit expansion. Second boldface: a challenge (introduced by 'however') that the correlation may be explained by urban density, not transit — undermining the proposal's causal logic.

First boldface = evidence for transit expansion (transit → lower emissions). Second boldface = challenge to the causal inference: maybe density (not transit) is the real driver of both outcomes. B correctly identifies this as evidence followed by a challenge to its causal implication.

Question 18: Method of reasoning: 'Dr. Chen is a leading cardiologist who states that moderate coffee consumption does not increase heart disease risk. Therefore, moderate coffee consumption is safe for the heart.' This argument proceeds by:

Presenting experimental evidence from controlled clinical trials
Appealing to the expertise of a credentialed authority to support a factual claim (Correct answer)
Using analogy between coffee and other caffeinated beverages
Drawing an inductive conclusion from population-level data

Correct answer: Appealing to the expertise of a credentialed authority to support a factual claim

The argument cites a cardiologist's expertise (authority) rather than presenting experimental data, analogies, or population statistics.

The argument's only support is Dr. Chen's credentials and statement. There's no reference to trials, population data, or analogies. This is an appeal to authority. B is correct.

Question 19: Boldface question: 'Some environmentalists claim that nuclear power plants pose unacceptable safety risks. In the past 30 years, advances in reactor design have dramatically reduced the probability of catastrophic failure. Still, no method of safe long-term storage for nuclear waste has been universally agreed upon. The debate over nuclear energy therefore remains unresolved.' The boldface portions play which roles?

Both boldface portions support the conclusion that nuclear power is safe
The first supports a pro-nuclear argument; the second introduces a persisting concern that prevents a definitive conclusion (Correct answer)
The first is the main conclusion; the second provides evidence challenging that conclusion
Both boldface portions oppose nuclear power

Correct answer: The first supports a pro-nuclear argument; the second introduces a persisting concern that prevents a definitive conclusion

First boldface: evidence that safety has improved (pro-nuclear). Second boldface: persisting problem (waste storage) that tempers the favorable evidence. Together they support the 'debate remains unresolved' conclusion. B is correct.

First boldface = evidence reducing safety concerns (supportive of nuclear). Second boldface = remaining unsolved problem (challenging nuclear). The combination of pro-evidence and remaining concern explains the 'unresolved' conclusion. B captures this balanced role assignment.

Question 20: Method of reasoning: 'If we allow students to submit AI-generated work, academic integrity will deteriorate. If academic integrity deteriorates, degree credentials will lose value. If degrees lose value, employers will find other ways to assess candidates. Therefore, allowing AI-generated submissions will eventually change how employers assess candidates.' This argument uses:

Analogy between AI submissions and past academic dishonesty scandals
A slippery slope chain of linked consequences (Correct answer)
Inductive generalization from survey data on employer preferences
Deductive elimination of alternatives to show the predicted outcome is inevitable

Correct answer: A slippery slope chain of linked consequences

The argument strings together a chain of if-then consequences, each following from the previous: AI submissions → integrity decline → degree devaluation → changed employer assessment. This is a causal chain/slippery slope.

The argument is a causal chain (a form of hypothetical syllogism extended across multiple steps): A→B, B→C, C→D, ∴A→D. When used in an argumentative context to imply dangerous downstream consequences, this is also called a slippery slope. B is most accurate.

Question 21: Boldface question: 'Removing bike lanes from Main Street would increase the space available for car traffic, reducing congestion. Some residents favor this change. However, studies of similar streets show that removing bike lanes typically causes only marginal congestion improvements while significantly reducing cyclist safety.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is a premise the argument endorses; the second is the argument's final conclusion
The first states a rationale for a proposed change; the second provides evidence that undermines that rationale (Correct answer)
Both boldface portions support removing the bike lanes
The first is the main conclusion; the second is a supporting premise

Correct answer: The first states a rationale for a proposed change; the second provides evidence that undermines that rationale

First boldface: the logic supporting lane removal (more car space → less congestion). Second boldface: introduced by 'however,' provides evidence that this rationale doesn't hold — congestion benefits are marginal while safety costs are high.

First boldface = rationale/premise supporting lane removal. Second boldface = evidence ('however') that challenges this premise. The argument ultimately suggests lane removal is not justified. B is correct.

Question 22: Method of reasoning: 'Company A and Company B are similar in size, market share, and industry. Company A implemented flexible work policies and saw a 15% increase in employee retention. Therefore, Company B would likely see a similar retention improvement if it implemented flexible work policies.' This argument proceeds by:

Deductive logic from a universal law about employee retention
Analogical reasoning: inferring that similar entities will produce similar results (Correct answer)
Inductive generalization from a large sample of companies
Statistical inference from population-level HR data

Correct answer: Analogical reasoning: inferring that similar entities will produce similar results

The argument draws on the similarity between A and B to infer that what worked for A would work for B — this is analogical reasoning.

Analogical reasoning argues that because A and B share relevant characteristics, and A experienced X when Y was applied, B would also experience X when Y is applied. B is correct. This is not deduction (no universal law) nor induction (not generalizing from many cases).

Question 23: Boldface question: 'Spending on primary education per pupil has increased 40% over the past decade in our state. Education advocates argue this investment is paying off. Yet standardized test scores have remained flat over the same period, with no significant improvement.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is evidence supporting the advocates' position; the second undermines it (Correct answer)
Both boldface portions support the education advocates' claim
The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second is evidence for it
The first contradicts the advocates' position; the second supports the main conclusion

Correct answer: The first is evidence supporting the advocates' position; the second undermines it

First boldface: data point supporting investment narrative (spending up 40%). Second boldface: 'yet' introduces contradictory outcome (flat test scores), undermining the claim that the investment is paying off.

First boldface = evidence used by advocates to support their position. Second boldface = 'yet' counterpoint: despite spending increase, no academic improvement has occurred. A correctly identifies the first as supportive and the second as undermining.

Question 24: Method of reasoning: 'A student argues: My essay should receive a higher grade because the student who sits next to me received an A for an essay of similar quality.' This argument proceeds by:

Providing objective evidence that the essay met the grading criteria
Appealing to consistency: if similar cases were treated equally before, this case should be too (Correct answer)
Using statistical analysis to compare essay qualities across the class
Making an emotional appeal to the teacher's sympathy

Correct answer: Appealing to consistency: if similar cases were treated equally before, this case should be too

The argument appeals to fairness and consistency — if a similar essay received an A, this essay should too. This is an appeal to consistency/precedent.

The student is not providing objective criteria evidence, statistics, or emotional appeals — the argument rests on consistency: similar cases should be treated similarly. This is an appeal to equal treatment / consistency with precedent. B is correct.

Question 25: Boldface question: 'The city's decision to convert a parking lot into a public park has been praised for improving green space access. Critics contend it has reduced parking availability for local businesses. Surveys of residents in the surrounding area indicate that foot traffic to nearby shops has increased by 22% since the park opened.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first presents the policy and its positive reception; the second provides evidence that counters the critics' concern (Correct answer)
The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second provides primary evidence supporting it
Both boldface portions support the critics' concern about parking
The first is evidence against the park conversion; the second is the main conclusion

Correct answer: The first presents the policy and its positive reception; the second provides evidence that counters the critics' concern

First boldface: describes the policy and its positive response (sets context). Second boldface: provides data showing foot traffic increased — evidence that the park benefits nearby businesses, countering the critics' parking concern.

First boldface = positive reception of the policy. The non-bold middle = critics' concern (parking reduction hurts businesses). Second boldface = evidence (22% foot traffic increase) that actually suggests local businesses benefit, countering the critics. A is correct.

Question 26: Method of reasoning: 'Either we increase taxes to fund infrastructure repairs, or our roads and bridges will deteriorate to dangerous levels. We cannot allow dangerous roads and bridges. Therefore, we must increase taxes.' This argument uses:

Inductive generalization from previous infrastructure failures
Disjunctive syllogism: eliminating one option from an either-or proposition to establish the other (Correct answer)
Analogical reasoning comparing infrastructure to other public services
An appeal to authority citing infrastructure engineering standards

Correct answer: Disjunctive syllogism: eliminating one option from an either-or proposition to establish the other

The argument presents two options (raise taxes OR dangerous infrastructure), eliminates one option (we cannot accept dangerous infrastructure), and therefore concludes the other option must be taken. This is a disjunctive syllogism.

Disjunctive syllogism: A or B; Not B; Therefore A. Here: A = raise taxes, B = dangerous roads. Not B (we cannot accept dangerous roads). Therefore A (raise taxes). B is correct.

Question 27: Boldface question: 'The government should subsidize electric vehicle purchases to reduce carbon emissions. Electric vehicles currently cost significantly more upfront than comparable gasoline vehicles. Without subsidies, adoption will remain limited to affluent consumers. Studies in countries with EV subsidies show adoption rates 3-4 times higher than countries without subsidies.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first introduces a problem that the argument's recommendation addresses; the second provides evidence supporting the recommendation (Correct answer)
The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second is supporting evidence
Both boldface portions challenge the subsidy recommendation
The first is evidence against subsidies; the second is evidence for an alternative policy

Correct answer: The first introduces a problem that the argument's recommendation addresses; the second provides evidence supporting the recommendation

First boldface: identifies the affordability barrier (problem justifying subsidies). Second boldface: international evidence showing subsidies work (support for recommendation). Together they support the government subsidy recommendation.

First boldface = the problem (high cost limits adoption), establishing WHY a subsidy is needed. Second boldface = the evidence that subsidies work effectively (3-4× adoption rate). Both support the recommendation. A correctly identifies both roles.

Question 28: Method of reasoning: 'Last year, our company hired 10 candidates from University X. Nine of them became top performers. This year, we should again focus our recruiting at University X.' This argument proceeds by:

Deductive logic from an established principle about University X graduates
Inductive reasoning: generalizing from past performance to predict future results (Correct answer)
Analogy: comparing University X graduates to those from similar institutions
Elimination: ruling out all other universities based on comparative data

Correct answer: Inductive reasoning: generalizing from past performance to predict future results

The argument observes past outcomes (9/10 from University X were top performers) and generalizes to a future prediction/recommendation. This is inductive reasoning.

Induction: specific evidence (past hires performed well) → general conclusion (University X produces good candidates → recruit there again). No universal rule is applied; the argument builds from observed instances. B is correct.

Question 29: Boldface question: 'Sleep research consistently finds that adults who sleep fewer than 7 hours per night perform worse on cognitive tests than those who sleep 7-9 hours. Some employers therefore discourage late-night work and early morning schedules. These cognitive tests, however, measure only specific executive functions and may not capture full workplace performance.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is evidence for employer policies; the second qualifies the strength of that evidence (Correct answer)
The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second supports it with additional evidence
Both boldface portions support the employer policies
The first challenges the employer policies; the second provides stronger evidence against them

Correct answer: The first is evidence for employer policies; the second qualifies the strength of that evidence

First boldface: research evidence supporting sleep-friendly scheduling. Second boldface: 'however' qualification limiting the scope of the evidence (tests measure only some functions). The argument's overall force is the evidence supports, but the measurement is limited.

First boldface = evidence supporting sleep policies. Second boldface = important caveat: the cognitive tests have narrow scope, weakening (but not destroying) the first's evidentiary force. A correctly identifies this as evidence followed by a qualifying limitation.

Question 30: Method of reasoning: 'Philosopher Y claims that a society is just if and only if it maximizes aggregate well-being. Our economic policy increases aggregate GDP. Therefore, according to Philosopher Y's framework, our economic policy is just.' This argument uses:

Inductive reasoning from historical examples of just societies
Deductive application of a stated definitional criterion to a specific case (Correct answer)
Analogical reasoning comparing our society to others
Appeal to authority based on Philosopher Y's academic credentials

Correct answer: Deductive application of a stated definitional criterion to a specific case

The argument takes Philosopher Y's definition (justice = maximizes well-being), applies it to the specific case (our policy increases GDP/well-being), and draws a conclusion within that framework. This is deductive.

Structure: If (and only if) P, then Q. P is true here. Therefore Q. This is a deductive argument using a definitional criterion. The conclusion follows with logical certainty if the premises are accepted. B is correct.

Question 31: Boldface question: 'A comprehensive analysis of 50 urban school districts found that per-pupil technology spending and student achievement are not significantly correlated. Proponents of ed-tech investment are skeptical of this finding. The study relied solely on standardized test scores as a measure of achievement, which may fail to capture creativity, critical thinking, and collaborative skills.' The boldface portions play which roles?

The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second provides supporting evidence
The first presents a finding that challenges ed-tech investment; the second provides grounds for questioning that finding (Correct answer)
Both boldface portions support increased technology investment in schools
The first is background context; the second is the argument's main conclusion

Correct answer: The first presents a finding that challenges ed-tech investment; the second provides grounds for questioning that finding

First boldface: the study finding that challenges ed-tech investment (no significant correlation). Second boldface: the methodological limitation of the study (narrow measurement), which gives grounds to doubt the first's conclusion.

First boldface = the challenge to ed-tech (no correlation found). Second boldface = methodological critique of the study: measuring only standardized tests is narrow, suggesting the first's finding may not capture the full picture. B correctly maps these as a finding followed by grounds to question it.

GMAT Verbal: Boldface and Method of Reasoning 1

The following argument contains two portions in boldface:
'**Many economists believe that raising the minimum wage significantly increases unemployment among low-wage workers.** However, recent studies of regions that enacted large minimum wage increases found no significant rise in unemployment. **Therefore, the concern about minimum wage increases causing unemployment is overstated.**'
The boldface portions play which roles in the argument?

🃏 GMAT Flashcards — Study This Quiz as Flip Cards →

📚 Want to go deeper? Read the Full GMAT Study Guide →