Drawing Deductive Conclusions Questions and Answers 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 Drawing Deductive Conclusions Questions and Answers flashcards as text
Premises: All employees must complete compliance training. No part-time worker has completed compliance training. Conclusion: No part-time worker is an employee.
Answer: The conclusion follows
If all employees completed training and no part-time worker has, it follows that no part-time worker can be an employee.
Premises: Some teachers are also researchers. All researchers publish papers. Conclusion: All teachers publish papers.
Answer: The conclusion does not follow
Only some teachers are researchers, so only those teacher-researchers must publish papers; the rest may not.
Premises: No documentary films won the Best Picture award this year. 'Ocean Depths' won Best Picture this year. Conclusion: 'Ocean Depths' is not a documentary film.
Answer: The conclusion follows
Since no documentary won and 'Ocean Depths' did win, it cannot be a documentary — this follows necessarily.
Premises: All squares are rectangles. All rectangles have four right angles. Conclusion: All squares have four right angles.
Answer: The conclusion follows
This is a valid chain syllogism: squares→rectangles→four right angles, so squares must have four right angles.
Premises: Whenever inflation rises, interest rates increase. Interest rates have increased. Conclusion: Inflation has risen.
Answer: The conclusion does not follow
This commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent; interest rates may rise for reasons other than inflation.
Premises: All registered voters received a ballot. No one under 18 is a registered voter. Conclusion: No one under 18 received a ballot.
Answer: The conclusion follows
Since ballots went only to registered voters and no under-18 persons are registered voters, none of them received a ballot.
Premises: If a candidate passes the written test, they are invited for an interview. Marcus was not invited for an interview. Conclusion: Marcus did not pass the written test.
Answer: The conclusion follows
This is a valid application of modus tollens: P→Q, ¬Q, therefore ¬P.