Critical Reasoning

I'm having particular trouble attacking assumption questions. This is the process I typically go through.

1) After reading the answer choices, sometimes I am able to eliminate 2 to 3 (out of scope) answer choices. Then I try the "assumption negation technique", which sometimes works for me. However, other times, it seems that even after negating the choices, they both still seem to work for me. Then, I try to eliminate based on how "specific" the answer choice is.

2) Other times, I completely blank out when reading the answer choices even though I completely understood the passage. (the argument, premise...etc)

I've already went through several different resources regarding this, but none seem to be helping. Is there some concept I'm misunderstanding? Or is there another angle I can take to understand these questions?

Thanks.

- Try looking for extreme words and boundary words
- If you find extreme words, check with the passage to find if it supports the extreme case
- I had the same problem and what I would do is
* Read the passage
* Find the conclusion
* Find the logical gap
* Formulate an answer, then look at the options
- Don't look at the options before formulating an answer, you will get confused !

Hope this helps !

hmgp22 wrote:I'm having particular trouble attacking assumption questions. This is the process I typically go through.

1) After reading the answer choices, sometimes I am able to eliminate 2 to 3 (out of scope) answer choices. Then I try the "assumption negation technique", which sometimes works for me. However, other times, it seems that even after negating the choices, they both still seem to work for me. Then, I try to eliminate based on how "specific" the answer choice is.

2) Other times, I completely blank out when reading the answer choices even though I completely understood the passage. (the argument, premise...etc)

I've already went through several different resources regarding this, but none seem to be helping. Is there some concept I'm misunderstanding? Or is there another angle I can take to understand these questions?

Thanks.

If negation is not working for you, then I think you need to take a second look at the way you are negating the answer choices. If you are not doing it right, this technique will not help!
Here are some tips about negation.

An argument can be broken in 2 ways through negation:
1. The conclusion itself is broken
2. The basis for the conclusion is proved to be questionable.
In either of these cases, the argument will no longer hold. Learn to recognize which of these cases is in action in the question.

Secondly, negate the answer choices the right way. Let me take an example:

Exposure to certain chemicals commonly used in elementary schools as cleaners or pesticides
causes allergic reactions in some children. Elementary school nurses in Renston report that the
proportion of schoolchildren sent to them for treatment of allergic reactions to those chemicals
has increased significantly over the past ten years. Therefore, either Renston's schoolchildren
have been exposed to greater quantities of the chemicals, or they are more sensitive to them
than schoolchildren were ten years ago. Which of the following is an assumption on
which the argument depends?
Option C: Children who have allergic reactions to chemicals are not more likely to be sent to a school nurse now than they were ten years ago.

You cannot negate option C as "Children who are not allergic to the chemicals are not more likely than other children to have allergies to other substances", simply because this is out of the scope of this argument. The correct way to negate option C is "Children who have allergic reactions to chemicals are more likely to be sent to a school nurse now than they were ten years ago."

Hope you got the hang of it.

gughanbose has given some good advice and Gowri as well!

If there is a clear logical gap then you can certainly jump on that one. Here is an article that discusses critical reasoning and specifically how to spot those "gaps in logic" that gughanbose mentioned. https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2013/02/ ... ng-ability


Let me also take slightly different angle. This next article talks about doing assumption questions where you DO NOT spot a gap. On assumptions you will not always see the gap. If you do not then you can approach the question using the "infomercial technique" described here.
https://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2012/06/ ... -an-expert

Don't over think it. Remember the essence is that you are just looking for the answer that is required by the argument!