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

Redeem

Seeking advice on approaching Strengthen / Weaken Qs

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:22 am

Seeking advice on approaching Strengthen / Weaken Qs

by justbeatit » Sat Aug 30, 2008 7:58 am
Hi guys

I was wondering how people approached CR strengthen weaken Qs...

I have so far completed the OG and verbal review CR sections and have scored over 90%. However, my practice verbal scores have fluctuated drastically - from 36 to 41, and I think this is mainly down to CR. In parcitular, I'm lacking a strong, consistent approach when dealing with strengthen weaken type Qs, which seem to be the most common Qs amongnst CR Qs ...

I've looked through most books - Kaplan, Princeton etc. Ususally,

For strengthening Qs - I tend to approach the Qs by thinking in my head that 'the argument makes even more sence because the answer choice eliminates any alternative causes' and for weakening Qs - I tend to approach the Qs by thinking that 'the arugment doesn't necessarily make sense because of an alternative cause' as you can see, I don't have a set framework / approach in dealing with these Qs...

Desperately seeking some advice here!

MAny thanks
Beat it, just beat it.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 8:53 am
Location: New York City
Thanked: 1 times

by GMATDavid » Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:53 am
Hello,

The first step is to identify the conclusion (what the passage is trying to prove) and the premises (the reasons for the conclusion). All of the premises must be considered as true. There will be some logical flaw in the reasoning -- the hidden assumption. In a strengthen question, the answer will make this assumption true. In a weaken question, the answer will make it false.

To find the hidden assumption, see if there is any critical concept in the conclusion that is absent from the premises -- and vice versa. The assumption is that these two critical concepts are linked. Otherwise, think about arguing against the conclusion over a beer; you would say yeah, all that may be true, but your conclusion is still wrong. On the GMAT, this assumption many times involves one of the following: (1) assuming that when two events are correlated, one caused the other; (2) assuming that an anology/comaprison between two things is fair; and (3) assuming that a survey or sample is large enough and fully representative.

Eliminate any answer choices that are irrelevant to the conclusion in light of the premises. In other words, if you accept the answer choice as true but would say "so, what?" it is wrong. Also, be very careful not to pick a strengthening choice on a weaken question or a weakening choice on a strengthen question.

Cheers,
David Stoll
The Princeton Review
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 5:22 am

by justbeatit » Mon Sep 01, 2008 3:13 am
Many thanks, that's useful advice.
Beat it, just beat it.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1