Practice Test for Critical Reasoning- 1 - GMAT MCQ

Munchon's contention is that buying their products safeguards health. To weaken that argument we can show that, for some reason, their foods might not be healthy. Munchon claims that the products are healthy because they contain only "natural ingredients". But bacteria and molds are 'natural' as are certain poisons derived from plants! Hence the word 'natural' is no guarantee of healthful properties.

The first statement is a factual statement and could be called a fact, finding, or situation, but not a position (which implies a view or conclusion). So we can eliminate answer D. The author's main conclusion is given in the sentence before the last one. And the last sentence (in bold) is a fact that supports this conclusion. Now only answer C acceptably explains the role of the last sentence.

The argument suggests that seat belt use might not increase the chances of survival, and so the best way to oppose the argument would be to find cases where seat-belt use does increase survival. Hence A is the best answer.

There is a 'missing link' between saying that the fruit is sour and saying that removing the sourness will make the fruit acceptable to American tastes. The missing link is an 'assumption' in this case. Obviously the missing statement should be that Americans don't like sour foods. So now we have found one assumption but this is an 'except question' and so we need to find three more! Since we are relying on the fruit for vitamin C it should be obvious that the author thinks the new process will not take away most of the vitamin. The author also thinks a market exists or they would not be starting to grow the fruit. He or she mentions salads as a way to use the fruit but there is nothing to suggest that there are no other ways to use the fruit and so D is not assumed and is the correct answer. He or she also assumes that there is nothing else wrong with the fruit. (Note: most students go wrong on 'except' questions!)

Since this is an 'except' question we must find four ways for Barbie to strengthen her position. The one answer that doesn't strengthen her conclusion will be correct. Barbie wants to use an agent and choices C and E point out benefits of the agent, while choices A and B point to reasons why the internet is not necessarily better. A careful look at D suggests that the agent might not always get the seller the best price, and so that is the best answer.

The author's contention (argument) is that the French are very fond of junk food because there are so many American restaurants in Paris. The best way to defeat this argument is to show, if possible, that the French do not eat in those American restaurants. The closest to that is answer E which suggests that the American tourists are the ones who eat at those restaurants.

Ada tells Jay that there are as many people in her office as in his, but fails to mention how many computers there are. If there is one computer to each person in her office, her argument is be invalid. To strengthen her argument she should show a similar ratio of computers to users. Thus C is the best answer. The actual number of people, computers or breakdowns is not really important as it is the usage that is in dispute. Thus answers A, D and E are not suitable. The type of computers is, no doubt, important in robustness, but the point that Ada is answering is whether there are too many people handling the same computer, and so we cannot choose B.

The hypothesis that obesity is a factor in the development of the disease cannot really be tested by looking at the current weights of the patients. They might have lost weigh recently (for any reason such as doctor's advice or even illness). Thus before concluding that obesity is NOT a factor in the development we need to know about their weights before the onset of the disease. Answer D is closest to this suggestion. In answer choice A the height is irrelevant as is the parental weight in E. In B, the weight at diagnosis is already too late to infer anything about the development of the disease. And in C what happens after the disease has developed is also irrelevant.

We cannot know that Jay thinks his computers are the best, and so A can be rejected. Similarly it is not possible to say whether he thinks he does not need more people, or thinks that software is not important, or even that no other office has a similar usage per computer. (Notice that these boldface strong words make us very suspicious.) The fact that Jay calls the frequency of breakdowns high, tells us immediately that he thinks the frequency is above average, and so B is correct.

The first part in boldface is a summary statement encapsulating the scientists' observations. The scientists' conclusion is in the next (non-bold) sentence. The critic doubts this conclusion and the second bold-face part is a statement of what he thinks the scientists ought to check. Hence the first part should be termed an observation/finding/ etc. Therefore A cannot be correct as it calls the statement a position (i.e. conclusion). The second part should be termed a suggestion or something similar; it cannot be termed a finding or a conclusion and so we eliminate B and D. E is incorrect as it suggests that the critic disputes the evidence, whereas we disputes the methods and conclusion. Answer C is best.