Distinguishing Facts from Inferences Flashcards
7 cards from real Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Distinguishing Facts from Inferences flashcards as text
A doctor notes: 'The patient's temperature is 103°F.' A nurse infers, 'The patient has an infection.' The nurse's statement is:
Answer: An inference because fever can have multiple causes.
A fever is consistent with infection but could also result from other conditions, making the nurse's conclusion an inference.
Which of the following pairs correctly labels each statement?
Answer: 'She left early' = fact; 'She was upset' = inference.
Leaving early is directly observable; being upset is an internal emotional state inferred from behavior.
Passage: 'Enrollment at the university fell by 8% this year.' The conclusion 'The university is in financial trouble' is best classified as:
Answer: An inference because enrollment decline does not confirm financial trouble.
Financial trouble requires additional evidence; enrollment decline is one possible contributing factor, not proof of the conclusion.
In Watson-Glaser terms, why are inferences considered less reliable than facts?
Answer: Inferences involve interpretation beyond direct observation and may be mistaken.
Inferences go beyond what is directly observed, introducing the possibility of error that verified facts do not carry.
A coworker says, 'Three people called in sick today — there must be a virus going around.' This is:
Answer: An inference because absences could have many other explanations.
Assuming a virus from three absences leaps beyond the observed data to an unverified causal explanation.
Which statement about a traffic accident report is a FACT?
Answer: The crash occurred at 4:47 p.m. at the intersection of Oak and Main.
The time and location are objectively recorded data, while the other options assign causes or blame that require interpretation.
A researcher observes that countries with higher chocolate consumption have more Nobel laureates per capita. Concluding that 'chocolate consumption causes intellectual achievement' is:
Answer: An inference confusing correlation with causation.
Correlation between two variables does not establish that one causes the other; inferring causation here exceeds what the data shows.