Critical Reasoning (CR) Practice Questions - 3 | GMAT Mock Test Series 2025 PDF Download

Q1: In Wareland last year, 16 percent of licensed drivers under 21 and 11 percent of drivers ages 21-24 were in serious accidents. By contrast, only 3 percent of licensed drivers 65 and older were involved in serious accidents. These figures clearly show that the greater experience and developed habits of caution possessed by drivers in the 65-and-older group make them far safer behind the wheel than the younger drivers are.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) Drivers 65 and older do not, on average, drive very many fewer miles per year than drivers 24 and younger.
(B) Drivers 65 and older do not constitute a significantly larger percentage of licensed drivers in Wareland than drivers ages 18-24 do.
(C) Drivers 65 and older are less likely than are drivers 24 and younger to drive during weather conditions that greatly increase the risk of accidents.
(D) The difference between the accident rate of drivers under 21 and of those ages 21-24 is attributable to the greater driving experience of those in the older group.
(E) There is no age bracket for which the accident rate is lower than it is for licensed drivers 65 and older.
Ans: (A)
Step 1: Identify the Question
The word assumption in the question stem indicates that this is a Find the Assumption question.

Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument
Argument Rates
<21 = 16%
21-24 = 11%
65 = 3%
x65 = 3%
© Expert + caution >65 = safer drivers

Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
On an Assumption question, you are looking for a piece of information that is necessary to draw the conclusion. In this case, the argument states that the lower accident rate for drivers 65 and older is caused because they are safer drivers. What else might cause a lower accident rate?

Step 4: Work From Wrong to Right
(A) [CORRECT] The cause of the lower accident rate among drivers 65 and over is their safer driving due to experience and caution. It is important to rule out alternate explanations for the lower accident rate. Mileage driven is one such alternate explanation. between two equally safe drivers, the one who drives fewer miles is less likely to get in an accident. This answer rules out the possibility that the lower accident rate for drivers is just due to driving fewer miles.
(B) The argument presents data about the percentage of drivers by age group who are involved in accidents. Thus, the number of drivers in each age group does not matter to these comparisons or the related conclusions.
(C) This choice provides an alternate explanation for the lower accident rate: weakening the conclusion. Drivers 65 and over may have a lower accident rate because they drive better conditions, not because they are safer drivers.
(D) This choice supports some of the logic in the conclusion - that experience results in safer driving. It is not necessary that the cause of the lower accident frequency for drivers 21 to 24 be the same as the cause of the reduction in accident frequency for drivers 65 and older. For example, suppose that 21 to 24 year olds have fewer accidents than those under 21 because they tend to drive with better brakes and other technology that may prevent accidents. Even in this case, those 65 and older could still be safer drivers due to their caution and experience.
(E) The conclusion is comparing drivers 65 and older to younger drivers, specifically those under 24. This conclusion and argument could still be valid even if there were some other age group (for example those 40 to 45) that has an even lower accident frequency.

Q2:  Public health expert: Increasing the urgency of a public health message may be counterproductive. In addition to irritating the majority who already behave responsibly, it may undermine all government pronouncements on health by convincing people that such messages are overly cautious. And there is no reason to believe that those who ignore measured voices will listen to shouting.
The two sections in boldface play which of the following roles in the public health expert's argument?
(A) The first is a conclusion for which support is provided. but is not the argument's main conclusion; the second is an unsupported premise supporting the arguments main conclusion.
(B) The first is a premise supporting the only explicit conclusion; so is the second.
(C) The first is the argument's main conclusion; the second supports that conclusion and is itself a conclusion for which support is provided.
(D) The first is a premise supporting the argument's only conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
(E) The first is the argument‘s only explicit conclusion; the second is a premise supporting that conclusion.
Ans: (E)
Step 1. Identify the Question
The boldface font and the word roles in the question stem indicate that this is a Describe the Role question.

Step 2. Deconstruct the Argument
Boldface #1: increasing urgency may backfire
Initiate the majority

Boldface #2: may undermine govt health messages
No reason to believe that people will listen to increased urgency
The argument is a little convoluted, so it may help to restate it in your own words. When the government makes a public health announcement, most people listen and act responsibly. Some don’t, though. Sending increasingly urgent messages to those people won’t actually make them respond responsibly and might actually make the ones who are responsible stop paying attention.

Step 3. Pause and State the Goal
The first boldface is the conclusion of the argument. The second is a premise in support of that conclusion.

Step 4. Work From Wrong to Right
(A) Hmm. Not the argument’s main conclusion? Check the argument again to make sure that you’ve got the main conclusion. Yep, the first boldface is the main conclusion, so this choice is incorrect.
(B) Is the first the conclusion, not a premise supporting the conclusion?
(C) Is the first the conclusion? Yes. The second supporting that conclusion, is the second also a conclusion? Check the two non-bold portions of the argument to see whether they provide support for this statement. Nope, both refer to people who don’t listen to the message they don’t address the people who do.
(D) The first is the conclusion, not a premise supporting the conclusion.
(E) CORRECT. The first boldface is the conclusion and the second is a premise supporting that conclusion.

Q3: Plantings of cotton bioengineered to produce its own insecticide against bollworms, a major cause of crop failure, sustained little bollworm damage until this year. This year the plantings are being seriously damaged by bollworms. Bollworms, however, are not necessarily developing resistance to the cotton's insecticide. Bollworms breed on corn, and last year more corn than usual was planted throughout cotton-growing regions. So it is likely that the cotton is simply being overwhelmed by corn-bred bollworms.
In evaluating the argument, which of the following would be most useful to establish?
(A) Whether corn could be bioengineered to produce the insecticide
(B) Whether plantings of cotton that does not produce the insecticide are suffering unusually extensive damage from bollworms this year
(C) Whether other crops that have been bioengineered to produce their own insecticide successfully resist the pests against which the insecticide was to protect them
(D) Whether plantings of bioengineered cotton are frequently damaged by insect pests other than bollworms
(E) Whether there are insecticides that can be used against bollworms that have developed resistance to the insecticide produced by the bioengineered cotton
Ans: (B)
Situation
Although plantings of cotton bioengineered to produce an insecticide to combat bollworms were little damaged by the pests in previous years, they are being severely damaged this year. Since the bollworms breed on corn, and there has been more planting this year in cotton-growing areas, the cotton is probably being overwhelmed by the corn-bred bollworms.

Reasoning
In evaluating the argument, which question would it be most useful to have answered? The argument states that the bioengineered cotton crop failures this year (1) have likely been due to the increased corn plantings and (2) not due to the pests having developed a resistance to the insecticide. This also implies (3) that the failures are not due to some third factor.

It would be useful to know how the bioengineered cotton is faring in comparison to the rest of the year's cotton crop. If the bioengineered cotton is faring better against the bollworms, that fact would support the argument because it would suggest that the insecticide is still combatting bollworms. If, on the other hand, the bioengineered cotton is being more severely ravaged by bollworms than is other cotton, that suggests there is some third cause that is primarily at fault.
(A) This would probably be useful information to those trying to alleviate the bollworm problem in bioengineered cotton. But whether such corn could be developed has no bearing on what is causing the bioengineered cotton to be damaged by bollworms this year.
(B) Correct: If bollworm damage on non-bioengineered cotton is worse than usual this year, then bollworm infestation in general is simply more than usual, so pesticide resistance does not need to be invoked to explain the bollworm attacks on the bioengineered cotton.
(C) Even if other crops that have been bioengineered to resist pests have not successfully resisted them, that fact would not mean that the same is true of this cotton. Furthermore, the facts already suggest that the bioengineered cotton has resisted bollworms.
(D) Whether other types of pests often damage bioengineered cotton has no bearing on why bollworms are damaging this type of cotton more this year than in the past.
(E) This might be useful information to those trying to alleviate the bollworm problem in bioengineered cotton, but it is not particularly helpful in evaluating the argument. Even if there are pesticides that could be used against bollworms that have developed resistance to the insecticide of the bioengineered cotton, that does not mean that such pesticides are being used this year.

Q4: When making a logical argument, it is essential to distinguish between theory and fact and to recognize the place of each. Theory suggests an idea or a hypothesis that might be true, but it requires the support of fact in order to verify it. Fact is the evidence or the proof that makes a theory valid; without fact, that theory is merely a concept for consideration and an idea that has potential. Theory is not always unacceptable in a logical argument, but that theory must be based on comparable facts from similar situations or examples. A logical argument founded on a theory usually ends in speculation, while a logical argument that builds on a theory with comparable facts can prove to be highly effective.
Which of the following does the passage above imply?
(A) Fact is always more important and more valuable than theory when making a logical argument.
(B) While theory has a place in a logical argument, it is generally better to avoid it altogether.
(C) Theory is basically equivalent to speculation and, as such, can undermine the strength of a logical argument.
(D) Theory should never be confused with fact, at the risk of making a logical argument that is entirely false.
(E) Theory has a place in a logical argument, but only if fact can be proven based on an analogous scenario.
Ans: (E)
Overview:
Question presents the student with a more abstract line of reasoning, in which the author of the passage makes the distinction between theory and fact. Theory is represented as "an idea or hypothesis," while fact is shown to be "evidence or proof." The author goes on to indicate that theory relies on fact for support, while fact can stand on its own. As the question progresses, the author provides context to this discussion by explaining the place of theory and fact in making a logical argument. The theory is valid if it has fact to back it up, but without fact theory can only be speculation. The question then asks the student to determine the answer choice that is implied by statements made in the passage. With this type of question, the student will definitely have to review the individual answer choices closely to locate the one that is correct. And as always with implication/inference questions, the student needs to be able to point back to the passage for the clear statement(s) of implication in order for the answer choice to be correct.

The Correct Answer:
(E) Answer choice (E) best expresses the implication made in the following statement: "Theory is not always unacceptable in a logical argument, but that theory must be based on comparable facts from similar situations or examples." In other words, the author is implying that a theory perfectly valid when making a logical argument, but the theory requires fact from an analogous scenario for it to have a solid place within the argument's line of reasoning. Answer choice (E) is thus correct.

The Incorrect Answers:
(A) The author does imply that fact is valuable for supporting and developing theory in a logical argument, but the author does not imply a statement of opinion that fact is always more important and more valuable than theory. The author seems more focused on discussing the place of each in logical arguments and in considering the way that the two elements work together. From the author's comments, it is possible to infer that theory developed by fact could be a very effective technique for making a logical argument. Claiming that fact is always more significant than theory assumes more than the passage implies, so it cannot be correct. Answer choice (A) may be eliminated.
(B) The author makes no statement about avoiding theory. In reality, the author suggests that theory supported by fact could be very valuable in making a logical argument. Answer choice (B) assumes too much, so it cannot be correct.
(C) The author indicates that theory void of fact (within a logical argument) "usually ends in a speculation." This means that theory without facts does not present a strong argument, but this does not mean that all theory in a logical argument (without fact) is the same as speculation. Answer choice (C) takes the author's words out of context, so it cannot be correct.
(D) The author does claim that "it is essential to distinguish between theory and fact." It cannot be inferred from this, however, that confusing theory with fact could lead to a logical argument that is entirely false. In reality, the author suggests that this could lead to a faulty or weak argument, but the author does not go to the extreme of the answer choice. As a result, answer choice (D) should be eliminated.

Q5: In Nation X, the average price of a new automobile is 15,000 to 20,000 US dollars, and the average automobile loses approximately ten percent of its market resale value each year.Therefore, if a two-year-old automobile is resold for only 10,000 US dollars, its loss in market resale value has been greater than average for Nation X.
Which of the following indicates a flaw in the reasoning above?
(A) Market resale value is only one measure of an automobile’s value.
(B) Some two-year-old automobiles in Nation X have market resale values in excess of 20,000 US dollars.
(C) It is possible for a new automobile in Nation X to cost 30,000 US dollars.
(D) A loss in market resale value beyond what is ordinarily expected does not necessarily indicate poor design.
(E) Not all new automobiles are sold for a price within the average range
Ans: (E)
Premise 1: The average price of a new automobile is 15,000 to 20,000 US dollars.
Premise 2: The average automobile loses 10% of its market resale value each year.
Conclusion: If a two-year-old automobile is resold for only 10,000, it's a loss in the market > average for Nation X.
(A) Market resale value is only one measure of an automobile's value. Incorrect. This choice only tells us the measure of an automobile's value.
(B) Some two-year-old automobiles in Nation X have market resale values in excess of 20,000 US dollars. Incorrect Irrelevant
(C)It is possible for a new automobile in Nation X to cost 30,000 US dollars. Incorrect. It does not tell anything about the flaw in an argument.
(D) A loss in market resale value beyond what is ordinarily expected does not necessarily indicate poor design. Incorrect. it brings new information about the poor design.
(E) Not all new automobiles are sold for a price within the average range. Correct. Yes, it gives us the reason to believe that an author fails to consider this fact: not all automobiles are sold within the average selling price range.

Q6: Dear Editor: I feel obliged to comment on the unfair review you published last week written by Robert Duxbury. Your readers should know that Mr. Duxbury recently published his own book that covered the same topic as my book, which you asked him to review. It is regrettable that Mr. Duxbury should feel the need to belittle a competing work in the hope of elevating his own book.
The author of the letter above makes her point by employing which method of argument?
(A) Attacking the motives of the author of the unfavorable review.
(B) Attacking the book on the same topic written by the author of the review.
(C) Contrasting her own book with that written by the author of the review.
(D) Questioning the judgment of the author of the unfavorable review.
(E) Stating that her book should not have been reviewed by the author of a competing work.
Ans: (A)
(A) It matches the last sentence: It is regrettable that Mr. Duxbury should feel the need to belittle a competing work in the hope of elevating his own book. It ascribes the unfavorable review penned by Mr. Duxbury to his self-aggrandizement.
(B) No. It never attack the competing book directly.
(C) No. No contrast is made. We only know that both cover the same subject.
(D) In a way, (D) is similar to (A). But (D) is a bit vague: If the author of the unfavorable review decided to promote his book by belittling the competing book under review, we might question the legitimacy / ethics of such judgment but not necessarily the judgment itself. We understand the judgment but question its righteousness.
Still, (D) is a strong contender.
(E) No. No reasonable author would take this position. Many books are likewise reviewed.

Q7: Correctly measuring the productivity of service workers is complex. Consider, for example, postal workers: they are often said to be more productive if more letters are delivered per postal worker. But is this really true? What if more letters are lost or delayed per worker at the same time that more are delivered?
The objection implied above to the productivity measure described is based on doubts about the truth of which of the following statements?
(A) Postal workers are representative of service workers in general.
(B) The delivery of letters is the primary activity of the postal service.
(C) Productivity should be ascribed to categories of workers, not to individuals.
(D) The quality of services rendered can appropriately be ignored in computing productivity.
(E) The number of letters delivered is relevant to measuring the productivity of postal workers.
Ans: (D)
Total no of letters : 100
A’s Delivery = 60 , B’s delivery = 40 [Theoretically A > B]
A’s letters lost = 30 , B’s letter lost = 5 {This part is ignored}
Effective Delivery of A = 30
Effective Delivery of B = 35
The objection implied above to the productivity measure described is based on doubts about the truth of which of the following statements?
(A) Postal workers are representative of service workers in general. - We know this , there is no doubt about this.
(B) The delivery of letters is the primary activity of the postal service. - We know this , there is no doubt about this.
(C) Productivity should be ascribed to categories of workers, not to individuals. - Out of scope.
(D) The quality of services rendered can appropriately be ignored in computing productivity. - Yes quality is word to ponder lets look further.
Effective Delivery of A = 30
Effective Delivery of B = 35
This part is definitely ignored while computing productivity.
(E) The number of letters delivered is relevant to measuring the productivity of postal workers.
If that is the case -
A’s Delivery = 60, B’s delivery = 40 [Theoretically productivity of A > B]

Q8: The economy is doing badly. First, the real estate slump has been with us for some time. Second, car sales are at their lowest in years. Of course, had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy. But, their occurrence together makes it quite probable that my conclusion is correct.
Which one of the following inferences is most strongly supported by the information above?
(A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.
(B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.
(C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.
(D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.
(E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.
Ans: (D)
A = real estate slump ; B = car sales at their lowest
Y = economy doing badly
Causation A + B --> Y

Common traps:

1. Y --> A + B is not true as there can be n number of factors that can cause the economy to slump.
2. A / B --> Y
3. Y --> A or Y --> B

Alternative scenario: ~Y --> ~ (A + B) is true
(A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.
Trap 2 - Wrong
(B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.
Trap 1 - Wrong
(C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.
Similar to Trap 2 - wrong
(D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.
Similar to alternative scenario = Correct
(E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.
Trap 1 - Wrong

Q9: The total national expense on higher education rose significantly during the past two years. This increase occurred contrary to previous assessments made by the Board of Education, and in spite of the fact that tuition costs in universities and colleges did not change during the same period of time.
All of the following statements, if true, help to explain the Board of Education’s erroneous assessments, EXCEPT:
(A) a growing number of students use their parent’s savings to pay for their higher education.
(B) many colleges raised the prices of dormitories and students’ services such as private tutors or book lending.
(C) the average interest rate of students loans rose last year by five percent.
(D) the demand for a Master’s degree has become more prevalent in many occupations.
(E) many students preferred to apply to state universities instead of colleges, in spite of the higher tuition.
Ans: (A)
The total national expense on higher education rose significantly during the past two years. This increase occurred contrary to previous assessments made by the Board of Education, and in spite of the fact that tuition costs in universities and colleges did not change during the same period of time.
All of the following statements, if true, help to explain the Board of Education's erroneous assessments, EXCEPT:
This question is DO NOT STRENGTHEN type and we are looking for statement that doesn't explain why spending rose. Since tuition did not change, the increase could be result of higher number of enrolling students or increase in costs related to education, such as students loans interest rate, transportation or living expenses
(A) a growing number of students use their parents' savings to pay for their higher education - this is actually a good fit, because the option doesn't tell anything about increase in spending per student, or increase of students; the option concerns SHARE of students, the financial education burden with parents
(B) many colleges raised the prices of dormitories and students' services such as private tutors or book lending - this option provides one reason why expenses increased. Students now have to pay more, therefore higher expenses
(C) the average interest rate of students' loans rose last year by five percent - this option provides another reason why expenses increased
(D) the demand for a Master's degree has become more prevalent in many occupations - from this we may infer that increased demand for Master led to higher number of people becoming students --> total (lets say countrywide) expenses rose accordingly
(E) many students preferred to apply to state universities instead of colleges, in spite of the higher tuition - as students shifted from colleges to universities, which have higher tuition costs, the students' expenses rose accordingly, therefore answer strengthens the statement.
Since all, except A, strengthen the statement, we are left with A.

Q10: It has been observed that sad music can trigger positive emotions. Under an independent study conducted to study the emotions evoked by different kinds of music, 44 volunteers, including musicians and non-specialists, were made to listen to two pieces of music - one sad and one happy. It was found that most of the volunteers reported experiencing emotions such as relief and calmness while listening to the piece of sad music.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the results of the study mentioned above?
(A) In various films centering on murder mysteries, happy music is used in the background of scenes that are visually disturbing.
(B) Participants were made to listen to the two pieces of music on different days.
(C) While listening to the piece of sad music, participants of the study felt the piece of sad music was more tragic and less romantic than they felt about the situations in their lives.
(D) Most of the participants heard the two pieces of music for the first time in their lives.
(E) Only a few people are good at separating the emotions experienced via art and those experienced in real life.
Ans: (C)
We are looking for a reason that sad people makes people feel happy, some way in which the sad effect of the music undergoes a transformation to make people happy.
This is what gives us a reason -- the sad people makes people compare their lives favourably to it, which in turn makes them positive about their lives. That's our answer.
(A) In various films centering on murder mysteries, happy music is used in the background of scenes that are visually disturbing, this seem right at first glance, but we need something that will explain how sad music is processed, not happy
(B) Participants were made to listen to the two pieces of music on different days, how does this help?
(C) Most of the participants heard the two pieces of music for the first time in their lives. - irrelevant
(D) Only a few people are good at separating the emotions experienced via art and those experienced in real life, that just makes the phenomenon even stranger