GMAT Verbal Reasoning – Critical Reasoning

The Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT) is a major part of applying to many business schools, and the Verbal Reasoning section plays a big role in showing how ready a candidate is for advanced business studies. One important part of this section is Critical Reasoning (CR), which really tests your analytical and logical thinking skills. Unlike Reading Comprehension, which is more about understanding what you read, Critical Reasoning is all about breaking down arguments, spotting assumptions, and figuring out what makes an argument strong or weak. These are the kinds of skills that are incredibly useful in the business world, where decisions often hinge on solid reasoning and analysis.

In a typical GMAT CR question, you’ll see a short passage—usually under 100 words—that lays out an argument or a set of facts. Then there’s a question stem followed by five answer choices. Your job is to analyze the argument and pick the answer that best addresses the question. These questions cover a range of logical reasoning skills, like finding assumptions, strengthening or weakening arguments, drawing conclusions, evaluating evidence, explaining contradictions, or understanding how an argument is structured. You can expect around 9 to 13 of these questions in the Verbal section, so they make up a good chunk of that part of the test. 

Understanding  Critical Reasoning Questions

The GMAT Critical Reasoning section employs various question types to assess a wide range of analytical abilities. While the exact distribution may vary, certain types appear more frequently than others. Notably, questions focusing on weakening arguments, strengthening arguments, identifying assumptions, and drawing inferences constitute around 75% of all CR questions. Familiarity with each question type and its specific demands is crucial for effective preparation.   

1. Assumption

These questions require identifying an unstated premise that must be true for the argument's conclusion to be valid. Typical question stems include phrases like, "Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?" or "The argument assumes which of the following?". Assumptions act as a bridge between the premises and the conclusion. Identifying them is essential for evaluating the argument's soundness and is often key to answering strengthen or weaken questions.   

2. Inference/Conclusion

These questions ask test-takers to draw a conclusion that must be true based solely on the information provided in the passage. Common question stems include, "Which of the following can be properly inferred from the passage?" or "If the statements above are true, which of the following must be true?". Unlike other CR questions, inference questions often do not present a stated conclusion in the stimulus. The correct inference should be directly supported by the passage without requiring additional assumptions or outside knowledge.   

3. Strengthen the Argument 

The objective of these questions is to select the answer choice that provides the most support for the argument's conclusion. Typical question stems include, "Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?" or "Which of the following provides the most support for the conclusion?". Strengtheners often bolster the underlying assumptions of the argument or present new evidence that makes the conclusion more believable. The key is to focus on the conclusion and how the answer choices impact its likelihood of being true.   

4. Weaken the Argument

These questions ask for the answer choice that most undermines or weakens the argument's conclusion. Common question stems include, "Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?" or "Which of the following casts the most doubt on the conclusion?". Weakeners frequently attack the underlying assumptions of the argument or present counter-evidence that makes the conclusion less likely to be true, even if the premises are accepted as true.   

5. Evaluate the Argument

The goal of these questions is to determine which piece of information or question would be most useful in assessing the argument's validity. Typical question stems include, "Which of the following would be most useful to know in order to evaluate the argument?" or "The answer to which of the following questions would be most important in evaluating the argument?". Often, the correct answer presents a scenario where different answers would either strengthen or weaken the argument, thereby testing an underlying assumption.   

6. Explain the Discrepancy/Resolve the Paradox 

These questions present a seemingly contradictory situation in the passage and ask for the answer choice that best explains this discrepancy. Common question stems include, "Which of the following most helps to explain the discrepancy?" or "Which of the following best resolves the paradox?". The correct answer typically provides a new piece of information that makes the seemingly contradictory facts consistent.   

7. Boldface

These questions feature an argument with two portions highlighted in boldface and ask test-takers to describe the role played by each of these portions in the overall argument. Typical question stems include, "In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?" or "The first boldfaced statement functions as …, and the second boldfaced statement functions as …". Answering these questions requires understanding the logical structure of the argument and the function of each boldfaced statement, such as whether it serves as a premise, conclusion, counter-premise, or evidence.   

Less common question types include "Complete the Argument" and "Find the Flaw," which also test specific aspects of critical reasoning.   

Illustrative Examples of GMAT Critical Reasoning Questions

To solidify understanding, let's look at examples of some major GMAT Critical Reasoning question types:

Example Questions w Answers

1. Argument Construction 

Question:

Solution:

2. Argument Evaluation 

Question:

Solution:

3. Formulating and Evaluating a Plan of Action 

Question:

Solution:

Resources and Practice Materials for GMAT Critical Reasoning

Preparing effectively for the GMAT Critical Reasoning section requires utilizing high-quality resources and engaging in consistent practice. Several options are available to students:

Official GMAT Materials: 

The most valuable resources are the official materials published by the Graduate Management Admission Council (GMAC). These include the GMAT Official Guide, which contains a wide range of practice questions with detailed explanations. The GMAT Verbal Review offers additional verbal practice questions. Official GMAT Practice Exams simulate the actual test environment and can help in assessing preparedness. Furthermore, GMAC offers GMAT Official Prep Question Packs for section-specific practice. Practicing with official questions is crucial as they accurately reflect the style, difficulty, and content of the actual GMAT.   

Prep Books: 

Several prep books offer structured learning and in-depth explanations of Critical Reasoning concepts and strategies. The PowerScore GMAT Critical Reasoning Bible provides detailed strategies and techniques for tackling various question types. The Manhattan Prep GMAT Critical Reasoning Guide offers comprehensive coverage of CR concepts. Additionally, the Kaplan GMAT Verbal Workbook provides further practice questions.   

Online Platforms: 

Numerous online platforms offer flexibility and a wide array of practice questions with detailed explanations and analytics. mba.com provides access to official practice materials and exams. GMAT Club is a popular forum with discussions, practice questions, and quizzes contributed by a community of GMAT test-takers and experts. Magoosh offers video lessons and a substantial number of practice questions. e-GMAT provides a structured online course with a focus on conceptual understanding. GMAT Ninja offers valuable articles and tips on CR strategies. Target Test Prep is another comprehensive GMAT preparation platform with extensive CR resources.   

LSAT Materials: 

Official LSAT Critical Reasoning questions can be an excellent supplementary resource for honing logical reasoning skills. While there are some differences between GMAT and LSAT CR questions, the core logical reasoning skills tested are highly transferable, and LSAT materials often provide a greater challenge.   

Essential Skills for GMAT Critical Reasoning

Excelling in GMAT Critical Reasoning requires a well-honed set of skills that go beyond basic reading comprehension. These skills are fundamental to analyzing arguments effectively and arriving at logically sound answers.

Analyzing Arguments: 

The cornerstone of Critical Reasoning is the ability to dissect an argument into its core components. This involves identifying the main argument, which typically consists of premises (the facts or reasons provided) and a conclusion (the message supported by the premises). Furthermore, it requires understanding the logical reasoning and structure of the argument, recognizing how the premises are intended to support the conclusion. Different arguments employ various reasoning patterns, such as causal reasoning, analogical reasoning, or deductive reasoning, and recognizing these patterns is crucial for effective analysis.   

Identifying Assumptions: 

A critical skill in evaluating arguments is the ability to recognize unstated premises, known as assumptions, that are necessary for the conclusion to be valid. Assumptions act as the often-unacknowledged links that hold an argument together. Identifying and questioning these assumptions is key to understanding the limitations of an argument and is particularly important for answering strengthen and weaken questions. Techniques like the negation test can be employed to verify whether a statement is a necessary assumption. If negating a statement makes the conclusion unlikely or impossible, then the original statement is likely a necessary assumption.   

Drawing Inferences: 

Critical Reasoning also tests the ability to make logical deductions and draw conclusions based solely on the information provided in the stimulus. Inferences should be directly supported by the text without introducing new information or making unwarranted assumptions. It is important to stick to what must be true based on the passage, rather than what could be true or what aligns with personal opinions.   

Evaluating Evidence: 

Another essential skill is the capacity to assess the relevance, strength, and sufficiency of the evidence presented in support of the argument. Understanding how evidence either supports or undermines a conclusion is crucial for answering strengthen, weaken, and evaluate questions. This involves determining if the evidence directly addresses the conclusion and identifying any gaps or alternative explanations.   

Understanding Logical Fallacies: 

Recognizing common errors in reasoning, known as logical fallacies, is also vital for success in Critical Reasoning. These fallacies include mistakes like mistaking correlation for causation, making generalizations based on insufficient evidence, and flawed use of statistical data. Familiarity with these common errors helps in identifying weaknesses in an argument's logic.   

Formulating and Evaluating Plans of Action: 

Some Critical Reasoning questions involve arguments that propose a plan or course of action. These questions require analyzing the argument and determining factors that would affect the plan's success. When tackling such questions, it is helpful to treat the goal of the plan as the conclusion and the plan itself as the premise.   

Attention to Detail and Precise Reading: 

Finally, success in Critical Reasoning hinges on the ability to carefully read and interpret complex arguments, paying close attention to nuances in wording and avoiding misinterpretations. Misreading the argument, question stem, or answer choices is a common pitfall. Therefore, it is essential to train oneself to read exactly what is written without paraphrasing or simplifying prematurely.   

Common Mistakes and Pitfalls

Even with diligent preparation, test-takers often encounter common mistakes in GMAT Critical Reasoning that can hinder their performance. Being aware of these pitfalls can help students avoid them and improve their accuracy.

1. One frequent error is misreading the argument, question stem, or answer choices. This can involve skipping over or misinterpreting crucial keywords and modifiers, such as "all," "some," "most," "only," "never," etc., which can significantly alter the meaning of a statement. Not fully grasping the author's reasoning before attempting to answer the question is another common mistake. Taking the time to identify the conclusion and the premises supporting it is crucial before evaluating the answer choices.   

2. Another pitfall is bringing in outside knowledge or personal opinions. GMAT Critical Reasoning questions test logical reasoning based on the provided text, not general knowledge. Therefore, it is essential to focus solely on the information presented in the stimulus when evaluating answer choices and to avoid making unwarranted assumptions or assuming connections that are not explicitly stated or logically implied.   

3. Test-takers should also be mindful of focusing on irrelevant details or getting distracted by captivating but unimportant information. Not all information in the stimulus is equally important for answering the question. It is crucial to prioritize understanding the core argument and the specific question being asked.   

4. Misinterpreting the question type is another common error. Applying strategies designed for one question type to another (e.g., looking for a strengthener when the question asks to weaken the argument) can lead to incorrect answers. Reading the question stem first is crucial for correctly identifying the question type and applying the appropriate problem-solving approach.   

5. Furthermore, test-takers should be wary of falling for common logical fallacies. These include errors in reasoning such as mistaking correlation for causation or making generalizations based on insufficient evidence. Familiarity with common fallacies can aid in identifying flaws in an argument's logic.   

6. Rushing through questions and not reading all answer choices carefully is a significant pitfall. Careless mistakes made due to time pressure can negatively impact the score. Taking the time to read and analyze each answer choice before selecting one is essential. Similarly, pre-thinking answers instead of thoroughly evaluating the provided choices can lead to bias and overlooking the correct answer if it does not align with the pre-conceived notion. It is generally more effective to focus on evaluating the given answer choices against the argument and the question stem.   

Finally, not understanding the scope of the argument and introducing information outside of it is a common mistake. The correct answer will always be logically related to the stimulus in the specified way and will remain within the argument's defined boundaries. 

For specific question types, certain techniques can be particularly helpful. For Assumption questions, using the negation test to check if a statement is a necessary assumption is a valuable strategy. For Strengthen and Weaken questions, the focus should be on how the answer choices affect the conclusion directly or by impacting the underlying assumptions. Evaluate questions often require looking for answer choices that present a "two-path" scenario, where different answers would have opposite effects on the argument's validity. When tackling Explain the Discrepancy questions, the key is to identify the surprising or paradoxical element and look for an answer that provides a plausible reason for it. Finally, for Boldface questions, breaking down the argument structure and determining the role each boldfaced statement plays in relation to the main conclusion is essential.