BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Authors writing detective stories

Expert replies
by BTGmoderatorDC » Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:58 am
Authors writing detective stories frequently include a brilliant detective and an incompetent investigator who embark on separate paths in an attempt to solve a crime. The separate accounts frequently consist of the incompetent investigator becoming distracted by the criminals' well-planned attempts and the competent detective solving the case after a violent confrontation. Many literary analysts believe authors often choose this storyline in an attempt to provide readers additional complexity and challenge in solving the investigation.
Which of the following most logically follows from the statements above?

A) A well-written detective story consists of an investigation being undertaken by a competent and incompetent investigator.
B) Some authors use an incompetent investigator to show the complexities of an investigation.
C) Authors never write stories with incompetent investigators who solve a case correctly.
D) Authors can use the separate investigative accounts to make predicting the correct outcome of the investigation more difficult.
E) Authors write stories with competent and incompetent investigators to show the complexity of real life.

Can some Experts explain logically?

OA D
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by EconomistGMATTutor » Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:29 am
This question asks you to draw a conclusion from the given evidence. The correct choice MUST be true.

Choice A: This choice states that there is only one way to construct a "well-written detective story." This cannot be concluded from the argument.
Choice B: This one might tempt you. Some authors DO use an incompetent investigator. However, the passage does not say that this is done to "show the complexities of an investigation." Using both an incompetent and a competent investigator is done to provide complexity to the reader in solving the investigation.
Choice C: This is too definite a claim. Never? The passage uses the term "frequently," not "always."
Choice D: This is the correct choice. Notice the less definite wording, which is often found in the correct choice in inference questions. Yes, authors CAN use
separate investigative accounts to make predicting the outcome more difficult. This is is virtually a paraphrase of the last sentence of the passage.
Choice E: Real life is not mentioned in the passage.

I'm available if you'd like a follow up.
GMAT Prep From The Economist
We offer 70+ point score improvement money back guarantee.
Our average student improves 98 points.

Image
Join the discussion

by BTGmoderatorDC » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:23 pm
EconomistGMATTutor wrote:This question asks you to draw a conclusion from the given evidence. The correct choice MUST be true.

Choice A: This choice states that there is only one way to construct a "well-written detective story." This cannot be concluded from the argument.
Choice B: This one might tempt you. Some authors DO use an incompetent investigator. However, the passage does not say that this is done to "show the complexities of an investigation." Using both an incompetent and a competent investigator is done to provide complexity to the reader in solving the investigation.
Choice C: This is too definite a claim. Never? The passage uses the term "frequently," not "always."
Choice D: This is the correct choice. Notice the less definite wording, which is often found in the correct choice in inference questions. Yes, authors CAN use
separate investigative accounts to make predicting the outcome more difficult. This is is virtually a paraphrase of the last sentence of the passage.
Choice E: Real life is not mentioned in the passage.

I'm available if you'd like a follow up.
Thanks a lot!
Join the discussion