Critical Reasoning (CR) Practice Questions - 1 | Practice Questions for GMAT PDF Download

To determine the impact of a flexible work week on employee productivity, we need to consider how each job function aligns with the proposed changes. 

Option A: Work undisturbed for several hours at a time.
Analysis: This depends on personal work habits and environment, not specific days.
Conclusion: Unlikely to be significantly affected by the choice of weekend days.

Option B: Submit their work for weekly managerial appraisal.
Analysis: Appraisals can be scheduled at the end of any work week, regardless of chosen weekends.
Conclusion: Can be easily adapted with proper planning.

Option C: Work late hours.
Analysis: Dependent on personal schedule and preference.
Conclusion: The new work week structure would not significantly impact this job function.

Option D: Collaborate on monthly group projects.
Analysis: Requires coordination among team members. Different weekends might cause scheduling challenges, but can be managed.
Conclusion: Can still be managed with good planning and coordination.

Option E: Correspond with banks daily, which are usually closed on Sundays.
Analysis: Daily correspondence with banks is crucial for some job functions. Banks typically do not operate on Sundays. If employees choose Sundays as part of their workweek, they would be unable to correspond with banks on that day, which would directly hinder their ability to perform this job function effectively.
Conclusion: This option is the most likely to decrease productivity. Employees would be unable to perform necessary daily tasks involving banks on Sundays, leading to a disruption in their workflow and productivity.

Option A: There are diary entries and correspondence that have survived to present-day which indicate Nannerl was as prolific as her brother.

• Reasoning: This option directly supports the idea that Nannerl had comparable talent to Mozart. If there is evidence showing she was prolific, it justifies the conclusion that posterity would recognize two genius Mozarts if her works had survived. This aligns perfectly with the composer's suggestion.
• Conclusion: This option is correct because it provides direct evidence supporting the claim about Nannerl's talent.

Option B: Most of Mozart’s musical ability was inherited from his parents who were themselves talented musicians.

• Reasoning: While this explains where Mozart might have gotten his talent, it does not provide any information about Nannerl's abilities or whether she was as talented as her brother.
• Conclusion: This option is not relevant to justifying the conclusion about Nannerl’s talent.

Option C: The composer’s opinion is shared by most experts on the Mozart family.

• Reasoning: While the opinion of experts might lend some weight to the composer's conclusion, it is not direct evidence of Nannerl's abilities. It suggests a consensus but does not provide concrete proof of her talent.
• Conclusion: This option does not provide the direct evidence needed to justify the conclusion about Nannerl’s potential recognition as a genius.

Option D: Women were not encouraged in Mozart’s day to become professional musicians.

• Reasoning: This provides context for why Nannerl might not have pursued or been recognized for her musical talents, but it does not provide any evidence about her actual abilities.
• Conclusion: This option explains societal barriers but does not support the claim about her talent or potential recognition.

Option E: Mozart’s earliest contributions were on the violin, while Nannerl’s were likely to be on the keyboard.

• Reasoning: This highlights the different instruments they played but does not offer any evidence about the level of Nannerl’s talent or productivity compared to her brother.
• Conclusion: This option does not address the key point about Nannerl’s abilities or how she would have been recognized.

Boldfaced Statement 1: "Mutant black moths living near the factories in the industrial area enjoyed a competitive survival advantage, since they blended in better with the sooty air and buildings."

• Role: This explains why black moths have an advantage in the industrial area, supporting the conclusion that black moths are a recent evolutionary development.

Boldfaced Statement 2: "The moths in nearby City Y, where there never were any factories, are all white."

• Role: This provides additional evidence supporting the conclusion by showing that the black moths are specific to areas with industrial pollution, not just a random variation.

Answer (C) is correct because:
The argument begins with two pieces of evidence (two colored moths in the industrial area, only one in the residential area). Then it continues with what turns out to be the conclusion of the argument (the black moth is a new evolution). The second sentence provides an interpretation of the given evidence that supports the conclusion. The final sentence provides an additional piece of evidence, which could also support the conclusion.
 

Here’s why the other options are not correct:

• A: The first statement is not the main conclusion but an explanation; the second statement supports the main conclusion, not an exception.
• B: The first statement is an interpretation, not direct evidence, and the second statement supports the main conclusion, not an alternative one.
• D: The first statement supports the main conclusion, not an alternate one, and the second statement supports the main conclusion, not an alternate conclusion.
• E: The statements support, not reject, the main conclusion.

The correct response is answer choice (D). The psychologists’ hypothesis is that “a juvenile delinquent is more likely than youth in the general population to become a diagnosed sociopath as an adult”. The reason given to support the psychologists’ hypothesis is that “punishment at a young age fosters antisocial behavior”.

One way to strengthen an argument is to show that the premises on which the argument is based are indeed valid. Answer choice (D) does this by suggesting that the length of time a juvenile spends in prison is related to the likelihood of a juvenile delinquent becoming a diagnosed sociopath later in life.

If you chose (A): This choice provides statistics that suggest that among adults diagnosed as sociopaths, those who were juvenile delinquents far outnumber those who were not juvenile delinquents. This answer choice merely confirms what the psychologists already stated. It does not support the causal relationship that the author suggests exists between juvenile delinquency/punishment and antisocial behavior later in life.

If you chose (B), remember that the mere existence of a similar correlation does not strengthen the original correlation.

If you chose (C), you’re missing the fact that the scope of the conclusion here relates to the diagnosis of sociopathy later in life. Answer choice (C) merely suggests that there is a correlation between detention in juvenile hall as a youth and antisocial behavior later in life. Just because two factors are correlated does not mean that one is the cause of the other. Some other factor could have been responsible for the antisocial behavior exhibited later in life. Answer choice (D) is a better choice.

If you chose (E), remember to be suspicious of unrelated statistics on GMAT Critical Reasoning. Just because less than 50% of sociopaths reported they spent < 1 year in juvenile delinquent facilities does not mean that the two factors are related. This answer choice merely suggests a correlation between two factors.

Option A: Wobsqua grass is highly desirable as an import-crop for its energy production potential, but is no longer widely considered a useful food source for grazing animals, so overall importing has actually decreased.

• Reason: A decrease in overall importing of Wobsqua grass does not explain the increase in profits. If imports decreased, it might suggest lower demand, which would typically lead to lower profits, not higher ones.

Option B: The price of raw fuel, needed to power harvesting machines for Wobsqua grass, decreased by 20% overall in the past decade.

• Reason: A decrease in fuel prices would lower the cost of harvesting Wobsqua grass, thereby increasing farmers’ profits if the selling price and crop size remained constant.

Option C: Interest in developing alternative energy sources led the United Nations to subsidize Wobsqua grass production in many principalities.

• Reason: Subsidies would reduce production costs or increase revenue, which could contribute to the increase in profits.

Option D: Wobsqua grass farmers, once relegated to the periphery of farmers' associations, have created their own cooperative association to share in common costs like lobbying government.

• Reason: Forming a cooperative could reduce individual costs and improve negotiation power, potentially increasing profits.

Option E: Newly developed technology for Wobsqua grass harvesting was introduced, allowing some of the work that could previously only be done manually to be done by means of the new technology.

• Reason: New harvesting technology would lower labor costs and improve efficiency, contributing to increased profits.

ConclusionOption A is the only choice that does not help explain why profits increased despite constant demand and crop size. The other options provide plausible explanations related to cost reduction or increased revenue, which could justify the profit growth.

To strengthen the argument for new legislation regulating the processing and distribution of wild-animal meat due to rising pollution levels, consider how each option impacts the need for regulation. The goal is to identify which option supports the necessity of regulating game meat.

The correct answer is (C). Here's why:

Analysis of Each Option

Option A: Habitat destruction presents a greater threat to wild game populations than does hunting.
This option discusses a different threat to wildlife, habitat destruction, and does not directly address the need for regulation of meat processing and distribution due to pollution.

Option B: Game meat is lower in unhealthy hormones and antibiotics than meat from commercially raised animals.
This option contrasts the health benefits of game meat compared to commercially raised meat but does not address the contamination problem or the need for regulation due to pollution.

Option C: Purchased game meat is the primary source of animal protein for a significant number of people.
This option strengthens the argument by highlighting the importance of game meat as a primary protein source for many people. If game meat is a significant food source for a large population, ensuring its safety through regulation becomes more crucial due to potential contamination.

Option D: The wild animal population has held fairly steady over the past decade.
This option speaks to the population stability of wild animals but does not address the issue of contamination or the need for regulation of meat processing.

Option E: Drafting appropriate legislation would be a lengthy and expensive process.
While this option acknowledges the challenges of creating legislation, it does not strengthen the argument for why new regulations are necessary due to contamination.

Conclusion
Option C strengthens the argument by emphasizing that game meat is a crucial food source for many people. This increases the urgency of regulating meat processing and distribution to ensure safety, given the rising contamination levels.

To determine which statement does not make the argument logically correct, we need to ensure that any additional premise supports the conclusion that Cheddar cheese has more saturated fat than Camembert cheese. Here’s how to analyze each option:

The correct answer is (E). Here’s the reasoning:

Original Argument

• Given: Cheddar > Gouda (in saturated fat).
• Given: Brie > Camembert (in saturated fat).
• Conclusion: Cheddar > Camembert (in saturated fat).

Option A: Camembert cheese has less fat than Gouda cheese.
If Camembert has less fat than Gouda, and Gouda has less fat than Cheddar (Cheddar > Gouda), then Cheddar > Camembert follows logically. This supports the conclusion.

Option B: Gouda cheese is higher in fat than Brie cheese.
If Gouda has more fat than Brie, and Brie has more fat than Camembert (Brie > Camembert), then it is not directly clear how Cheddar relates to Camembert. We need to ensure that Cheddar's fat content is more than Camembert's based on given relations. This option does not necessarily disrupt the conclusion but adds complexity.

Option C: Gouda cheese and Brie cheese have the same fat content.
If Gouda and Brie have the same fat content, and Brie has more fat than Camembert (Brie > Camembert), then Cheddar > Camembert follows because Cheddar > Gouda and Gouda = Brie. This supports the conclusion.

Option D: The fat content of Cheddar cheese is equal to the fat content of Brie.
If Cheddar and Brie have the same fat content and Brie has more fat than Camembert (Brie > Camembert), then Cheddar also has more fat than Camembert (Cheddar = Brie > Camembert). This supports the conclusion.

Option E: Brie cheese is higher in saturated fat than Cheddar cheese.
If Brie has more fat than Cheddar (Brie > Cheddar), this contradicts the initial assumption that Cheddar has more fat than Gouda. This directly challenges the basis of the argument and makes the conclusion (Cheddar > Camembert) logically incorrect or unsupported.

Conclusion
Option E does not support the argument because it contradicts the premise that Cheddar cheese has more saturated fat than Gouda cheese and thus undermines the argument's conclusion.

Option B assumes that the skills developed from playing the violin are applicable to all musical instruments. This is crucial because the argument generalizes from the specific case of violin training to the broader category of all musical instruments. If the benefits of learning the violin do not apply to other instruments, the conclusion that learning any musical instrument improves academic performance would not be valid.

Why Other Options Are Not Correct

• Option A: This option suggests that there are other factors influencing academic performance but doesn’t address the generalizability of the benefits from violin training to other instruments.

• Option C: This option implies that academic prowess results from skills gained by learning an instrument, but it doesn’t address the need for these skills to be common across different musical instruments.

• Option D: This challenges the existence of a correlation between musical skill and academic performance, which does not address the assumption that the benefits of learning the violin apply to other instruments.

• Option E: This option is unrelated, focusing on the specific benefits of violin training compared to other instruments, which is irrelevant to the assumption that skills from one instrument generalize to others.

Option A: A competitor’s switch to commission doesn’t affect Eatco’s pay structure.

Option B: Out-of-stock items might impact sales temporarily but don’t directly affect the overall commission assurance.

Option C: Changes in health insurance benefits don’t impact the commission earnings.

Option D: New restaurants should increase sales opportunities, likely benefiting current salespeople.

Option E: Hiring more salespeople means the same amount of commission is spread among more people, potentially lowering the earnings for existing staff, thus challenging the assurance that pay will remain the same or increase.

Hence, Option E directly affects the commission distribution, potentially reducing existing salespeople’s earnings, which conflicts with the executives’ assurance. Therefore, it is the correct choice.

(A) is the correct choice. Since we’re trying to “bolster,” or strengthen, the manager’s interpretation, it’s helpful to ask, “why?” Why would seeing pictures of food cause customers to order more food? The correct choice will reinforce the stated cause/effect relationship. We can strengthen the claim that visual stimulation causes an increase in desire for food by showing that there is an increase in desire for food in the presence of visual stimulation or by showing that there is a reduced desire for food in the absence of visual stimulation. Answer choice (A) strengthens the manager’s interpretation by suggesting that customers ordered less food when the specials menu was not displayed.

If you chose (B), this answer choice does not help relate the visual cue of the specials menu to ordering a super-size meal, and therefore would not bolster the manager’s conclusion.

If you chose (C), this choice is out of scope. The argument is only concerned with linking the visual images of food to the increased number of “super-sized” orders. The ordering of the specials themselves is tertiary.

If you chose (D), just because seeing the specials menu and super-sizing an order are correlated does not mean that there is a cause/effect relationship between the two variables. Customers may have ordered super-sized meals for any number of reasons other than seeing the specials menu prior to ordering. For example, if the super-sized orders came with a free drink, customers may prefer super-sized orders for that reason.

If you chose (E), there could be many reasons why Burger King next door had fewer “super-size” sales than the surveyed restaurant. This choice is far too vague. Look for a more specific choice to bolster the manager’s interpretation: that “seeing” pictures of food leads to ordering more food.