Practice Test GeeksOACP - Ontario Association of Chief of Police Practice Test
← All OACP Flashcard Decks

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning Flashcards

7 cards from real OACP practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.

Read the first 7 Deductive and Inductive Reasoning flashcards as text

  1. During the OACP test, a passage states: 'Experienced officers always file complete reports. Constable Rivera is experienced.' What must be true?

    Answer: Constable Rivera files complete reports

    The universal premise combined with the specific premise deductively guarantees the conclusion.

  2. Which of the following best illustrates affirming the consequent — an invalid deductive form?

    Answer: If it is arson, there will be accelerant. There is accelerant. Therefore it is arson.

    Affirming the consequent is invalid because other causes could explain the presence of accelerant.

  3. A criminologist reviews records and notes that 85% of repeat offenders in a district were previously convicted of theft. She infers that theft history is a risk factor for reoffending. This reasoning is:

    Answer: Inductive and probabilistic

    Statistical patterns drawn from records form an inductive, probabilistic inference rather than a certain deductive conclusion.

  4. An officer's logic: 'Either the witness is lying or mistaken. The witness is not lying. Therefore the witness is mistaken.' This argument uses:

    Answer: Disjunctive syllogism

    Disjunctive syllogism eliminates one option from an either/or premise to confirm the other.

  5. In OACP reading comprehension, you encounter: 'Most community policing initiatives reduce fear of crime. Initiative X is a community policing initiative.' The BEST conclusion is:

    Answer: Initiative X will probably reduce fear of crime

    'Most' signals an inductive premise, so the conclusion is probable rather than certain.

  6. A supervisor notices five new recruits all struggled with night-shift paperwork in their first month and concludes that all recruits need extra paperwork training at night. This is an example of:

    Answer: Hasty generalization — a weak inductive fallacy

    Drawing a universal conclusion from a small, possibly unrepresentative sample is a hasty generalization.

  7. Which chain of reasoning represents a VALID hypothetical syllogism?

    Answer: If A then B; if B then C; therefore if A then C

    Hypothetical syllogism chains two conditional statements to produce a valid third conditional conclusion.