SATs Logical Reasoning & Analysis 2 ā Questions and Answers
Question 1: Which of the following is an unstated assumption in this argument: 'Maria studies every night, so she will pass the exam'?
- Maria has taken the exam before.
- Studying every night is sufficient to pass the exam. (Correct answer)
- Maria is enrolled in a test-prep course.
- The exam is scheduled next week.
Correct answer: Studying every night is sufficient to pass the exam.
The argument assumes that nightly studying alone is enough to guarantee passing, which is never stated.
Question 2: A student argues: 'If it rains, the game is cancelled. The game was not cancelled. Therefore, it did not rain.' This reasoning is an example of:
- Affirming the consequent
- Denying the antecedent
- Modus tollens (Correct answer)
- Circular reasoning
Correct answer: Modus tollens
Modus tollens is the valid form: if PāQ and Ā¬Q, then Ā¬P.
Question 3: Which statement, if true, most weakens the claim that 'schools with longer lunch periods produce better academic outcomes'?
- Students in those schools eat healthier foods.
- Wealthier districts, which also have more resources, tend to have longer lunch periods. (Correct answer)
- Teachers at those schools report higher job satisfaction.
- Students prefer longer lunch periods in surveys.
Correct answer: Wealthier districts, which also have more resources, tend to have longer lunch periods.
If wealth explains both longer lunches and better outcomes, lunch period length itself may not be the cause.
Question 4: All athletes are disciplined. Some disciplined people are successful. Which conclusion is definitely true?
- All athletes are successful.
- Some athletes are successful.
- No athletes are successful.
- It cannot be determined whether any athlete is successful. (Correct answer)
Correct answer: It cannot be determined whether any athlete is successful.
The overlap between disciplined people and successful people may or may not include any athletes.
Question 5: A passage states: 'Since attendance at the museum doubled after the new exhibit opened, the new exhibit caused the increase.' Which flaw does this reasoning contain?
- False dichotomy
- Hasty generalization
- Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Correct answer)
- Ad hominem
Correct answer: Post hoc ergo propter hoc
Assuming that because B followed A, A caused B, is the post hoc fallacy.
Question 6: If the statement 'No doctors are lazy' is true, which of the following must also be true?
- All lazy people are not doctors. (Correct answer)
- Some doctors are lazy.
- All doctors are hardworking.
- Lazy people cannot become doctors.
Correct answer: All lazy people are not doctors.
If no doctors are lazy, then every lazy person is necessarily not a doctor (contrapositive logic).
Question 7: A researcher concludes that a new drug is effective because patients who took it recovered faster. To strengthen this conclusion, it would be most helpful to know:
- The price of the drug compared to existing treatments.
- Whether a control group not taking the drug recovered more slowly. (Correct answer)
- The age range of the patients who participated.
- How long the drug has been in development.
Correct answer: Whether a control group not taking the drug recovered more slowly.
A control group comparison is needed to rule out natural recovery and confirm the drug's causal role.
SATs Logical Reasoning & Analysis 2
Which of the following is an unstated assumption in this argument: 'Maria studies every night, so she will pass the exam'?