Hi src_saurav,

For many CR/RC questions, the process of predicting an answer (either general or specific) is quite useful. By taking some basic notes, 'linking' ideas and forming a prediction, you'll likely save time when evaluating the answer choices. Assuming that your thought process and attention-to-detail are correct, then you just have to find the answer that matches your prediction. If your prediction is not there (since sometimes a prompt has more than 1 assumption behind it), then you should have the necessary insight (from making your prediction) to spot the alternative answer that happens to be correct.

This is all meant to say that taking an 'active' process and making a prediction is useful even if your prediction is not among the answer choices.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich

For CR question types that involve a logical flaw in the argument - assumption, strengthen, weaken, and evaluate - it is definitely best to try to think about the answer first. You might not predict exactly what it will look like, but at least define what the logical gap is: "here's the disconnect between the given premises and the conclusion, so the answer will have to address that."

Your process of negating answer choices is also very helpful. You'll move through faster, though, if you have an idea in mind first about what the answer should address.

Here's another tip: the right answer on an assumption question will often be framed in the negative. For example:

... residents will not dump their trash...
... children are not more likely to be sent to the nurse...
... emissions cannot be further reduced by using...