GRE Verbal
Practice Test 4 for GRE Verbal: real questions and explanations from the Varsity Tutors practice-test pool.
0%
0 / 25 answered
Question 1 of 25
A nutrition researcher reports that, in a study of 300 adults, participants who ate a serving of nuts at least five days per week had lower average LDL cholesterol than participants who ate nuts less frequently. The researcher concludes that increasing nut consumption lowers LDL cholesterol and recommends that adults add nuts to their diets to improve heart health. Which of the following best bolsters the author’s reasoning?
Question Navigator
A nutrition researcher reports that, in a study of 300 adults, participants who ate a serving of nuts at least five days per week had lower average LDL cholesterol than participants who ate nuts less frequently. The researcher concludes that increasing nut consumption lowers LDL cholesterol and recommends that adults add nuts to their diets to improve heart health. Which of the following best bolsters the author’s reasoning?
Explanation: This question tests your ability to strengthen an argument by identifying evidence that supports the conclusion. Strengthening an argument involves providing information that makes the conclusion more likely to be true given the premises. The argument concludes that increasing nut consumption lowers LDL and recommends adding nuts for heart health, based on lower LDL in frequent nut eaters. A vulnerability is that correlational data might reflect lifestyle confounders, not causation. Choice B strengthens the argument by providing randomized trial evidence of LDL reduction from nuts, supporting causation. In contrast, choice A is a distractor that introduces a confounder, like more exercise among nut eaters. Choice C is irrelevant, as nutrient content does not prove causal effects.
A software firm notes that customer support tickets about password resets fell sharply after it introduced optional biometric login on its mobile app. The firm also found that each password-reset ticket costs several dollars in staff time. Because biometric login can be extended to the desktop version with minimal development effort, the firm argues that it should add biometric login there as well to reduce support costs. Which statement is the author primarily trying to establish?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to identify an argument’s conclusion in a GRE Verbal Reasoning context. Conclusions are the main claims or recommendations that the argument aims to establish, while premises are the supporting evidence or reasons provided to justify that claim. The passage notes reduced password-reset tickets after mobile biometrics and quantifies ticket costs. It then proposes extending biometrics to desktop for similar low-effort savings. Choice C best states the conclusion because it directly expresses the argument’s recommendation to add desktop biometrics for cost reduction. However, choice A is merely a premise, providing cost data as evidence without serving as the main claim. Similarly, choice B acts as evidence of the mobile success but does not encapsulate the extension proposal.
Select the answer choice that best completes the sentence. The reviewer found the film’s pacing uneven: the opening is deliberately slow, but the final act becomes so that key motivations are barely explained.
Explanation: This question tests logical fit in Text Completion through contrast in pacing. The sentence establishes uneven pacing with a colon explaining the contrast: 'deliberately slow' opening versus a final act so [blank] that motivations are barely explained. The correct answer 'hurried' (D) creates the necessary contrast with 'slow' and explains why motivations would be inadequately explained—rushing through prevents proper development. This word satisfies the logic of contrast and consequence. 'Meandering' (A) or 'meditative' (E) would fail to contrast with 'slow' and wouldn't explain why motivations are barely explained.
A conservation agency reintroduced an apex predator to a national park. Ecologists expected that reducing the population of a large herbivore would allow young trees to recover. After five years, surveys showed that the herbivore population did decline markedly, yet the density of young trees in river valleys also declined. At the same time, the number of beavers in those valleys increased substantially, and beaver dams became more common. Which explanation best accounts for the situation described?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to resolve a paradox by identifying an explanation that reconciles two seemingly contradictory facts. Paradox questions require finding a choice that accounts for both the decline in herbivores and the unexpected decline in young tree density in river valleys. The correct answer explains that increased beaver activity caused flooding, which reduced seedling survival despite lower browsing from herbivores. This accounts for the predator's impact on herbivores by allowing reduced browsing pressure, while beaver dams explain the tree decline through a separate mechanism. Thus, it resolves the paradox by introducing an intervening factor that offsets the expected tree recovery. In contrast, choice A addresses only herbivore behavior but fails to explain why tree density declined if browsing shifted. Similarly, choice D notes broader ecosystem effects but does not reconcile the specific decline in young trees with reduced herbivores.
Passage:
In climate science, detection-and-attribution studies aim to determine whether observed climate changes can be explained by natural variability alone or whether human influences are required. Early studies focused on global mean temperature because it offers a relatively high signal-to-noise ratio.
Later work incorporated spatial “fingerprints,” comparing observed patterns of warming across latitudes and between land and ocean to patterns predicted by models under different forcings. These fingerprint approaches can strengthen attribution because some natural drivers produce distinctive spatial patterns.
However, model uncertainty complicates interpretation. Different models represent cloud feedbacks and aerosol effects differently, which can alter the magnitude and regional distribution of predicted warming. Researchers therefore often use multi-model ensembles and evaluate whether key features of the fingerprint are robust across model structures.
Separately, paleoclimate reconstructions provide estimates of temperature variability before instrumental records. These reconstructions suggest that while substantial regional fluctuations occurred, the recent global-scale trend is unusual in both magnitude and coherence across regions.
Question: Based on the passage, which conclusion can be drawn by combining information from multiple paragraphs?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to synthesize information across the passage by integrating attribution methods with model uncertainties and paleoclimate context. Synthesis requires combining facts or claims from different sections, like global means with spatial patterns and variability estimates. The first paragraph focuses on global temperature for attribution, while the second adds spatial fingerprints. The third discusses model uncertainties requiring robustness, and the fourth notes unusual recent trends. Combining these supports choice C, strengthening claims with patterns and context despite uncertainties. A distractor like A overstates fingerprints from the second, ignoring models in the third. D contradicts the fourth paragraph's unusual trends, failing synthesis.
A public health researcher claims that introducing a small tax on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) reduces overall sugar consumption. The researcher cites (1) sales data from City M showing that SSB purchases decreased by 9% in the year after a 1-cent-per-ounce tax, while bottled water purchases increased by 6%; (2) a survey in City M in which respondents reported drinking fewer SSBs but also reported buying more fruit juice; (3) a neighboring City N without a tax where SSB purchases decreased by 3% over the same period; and (4) a report noting that City M ran a concurrent media campaign encouraging residents to “choose water.”
Which of the following best characterizes the support for the author’s claim?
Explanation: This question tests your ability to evaluate evidence for a public health intervention's effectiveness. When evaluating evidence for policy claims, you must consider both the primary effects and potential confounding factors or unintended consequences. The researcher claims that a beverage tax reduces overall sugar consumption, citing decreased SSB purchases, increased water purchases, survey data showing SSB reduction but increased fruit juice consumption, a smaller decrease in a neighboring city without the tax, and a concurrent media campaign. The evidence suggests an association between the tax and reduced SSB purchasing that exceeds the trend in the control city, supporting the claim's direction. However, the substitution to fruit juice (which also contains sugar) complicates the claim about overall sugar consumption, and the concurrent media campaign represents a confounding factor that could independently influence behavior. The Correct answer (C) recognizes these complexities: the evidence shows promise but includes substitution effects and confounding factors. Answer choice A overstates the evidence by claiming it conclusively shows the tax alone caused the change, while choice B incorrectly dismisses beverage purchases as irrelevant to sugar consumption when they are directly related.
Passage:
In neuroscience, the “default mode network” (DMN) was initially identified as a set of brain regions more active during rest than during many externally focused tasks. Early interpretations linked the DMN to mind-wandering and self-referential thought.
Later experiments broadened the picture. The DMN also shows engagement during tasks involving autobiographical memory and imagining future scenarios, suggesting a role in constructing internal models rather than mere idle activity. Moreover, the DMN’s activity can be coordinated with other networks during complex cognition.
Clinical studies report altered DMN connectivity in several conditions. In depression, some findings associate DMN hyperconnectivity with rumination, while in Alzheimer’s disease, disruptions in DMN regions overlap with areas vulnerable to amyloid deposition. However, researchers caution that similar-looking connectivity changes can arise from different underlying mechanisms.
Methodologists add that measuring “rest” is itself challenging: participants may differ in what they think about during scanning, and head motion can introduce artifacts that mimic connectivity differences. Improved preprocessing reduces but does not eliminate these concerns.
Question: Which statement is best supported by synthesizing information throughout the passage?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to synthesize information across the passage by merging DMN characterizations with task engagements, clinical findings, and methodological cautions. Synthesis requires combining facts or claims from different sections, like rest activity with modeling roles and interpretive challenges. The first paragraph identifies DMN at rest, but the second broadens to internal tasks and coordination. The third reports clinical alterations with mechanisms caution, and the fourth notes measurement artifacts. Combining these supports choice C, suggesting modeling support and cautious interpretation. A distractor like A limits to rest from the first, ignoring engagements in the second. B overstates diagnostics from the third without methodological caveats.
An education researcher claims that later school start times improve attendance. The researcher cites: (1) District D moved start times from 7:30 to 8:20, and average daily attendance in grades 9–12 rose from 91.2% to 92.6% the following year; (2) in the same year, the district also implemented a new automated parent notification system for absences; and (3) a student survey reported that 54% of students said they slept at least 30 minutes more on school nights after the change.
Which statement best evaluates how the author uses evidence?
Explanation: This question tests the skill of evaluating evidence in a passage by assessing how well it supports a given claim. Evidence must be assessed relative to the claim it supports, examining its relevance, strength, and any limitations in establishing causation or sufficiency. The passage cites three pieces of evidence: increased attendance after a start time change, a concurrent new notification system, and a survey reporting more sleep. These show association and a mechanism but include a potential alternative explanation. The Correct answer, choice C, accurately characterizes the evidence as providing association while noting the confounding policy change. In contrast, choice A exaggerates by claiming definitive causation, ignoring the alternative factor. Likewise, choice E fails by demanding a national law, an overly broad criterion not required for district-level evidence.
Passage:
In debates about online misinformation, one proposal is to rely on automated content moderation to identify and remove false claims at scale. Supporters argue that the volume and speed of social media posts make human review insufficient; machine learning systems, continually updated, could flag misleading content quickly and consistently. The promise is a kind of technical fix to a social problem.
Opponents respond that automated systems struggle with context. Satire, quoted material, and evolving scientific claims can be misclassified, and adversarial actors can learn to evade detection. More fundamentally, critics worry that delegating epistemic authority to opaque algorithms risks suppressing legitimate dissent and entrenching the biases of those who design the models.
Recognizing these concerns, some researchers advocate a hybrid approach. Automation can be used to triage—surfacing likely problems for human reviewers—while platforms invest in transparent appeals processes and in reducing the virality of unverified claims rather than deleting them outright. This approach reframes moderation as risk management under uncertainty, not as the elimination of error.
Question: The primary function of the second paragraph is to…
Explanation: This question tests the reader's understanding of passage structure and organization in GRE Verbal Reasoning. Structure concerns how ideas are arranged to support the author’s purpose, such as proposal, counterarguments, and hybrid. The second paragraph offers counterarguments to automation by highlighting contextual struggles and governance risks. This complicates the technical fix narrative, setting up the hybrid approach. Choice B correctly identifies this oppositional function. A distractor like choice A fails by suggesting neutral summary, ignoring the critical role. Likewise, choice C misaligns as a case study of success, confusing content with organizational counterpoint.
Passage:
In literary studies, some critics argue that the rise of the novel in the eighteenth century reflected a growing emphasis on individual interiority. They point to first-person narration and detailed psychological description as evidence that readers increasingly valued private experience.
Other scholars caution that formal features alone do not determine how texts were read. Archival work on lending libraries suggests that many novels circulated in social settings: families read aloud together, and readers discussed installments in coffeehouses. In these contexts, novels could function as prompts for collective debate rather than as vehicles for solitary introspection.
A third perspective comes from book history. Printers and publishers often marketed novels by emphasizing moral instruction or social satire, framing them as guides to conduct. Such marketing may have shaped readers’ expectations, encouraging them to treat fictional characters as exemplars or warnings.
Finally, recent digital humanities projects analyze marginalia and readers’ letters. These sources reveal that some readers indeed identified strongly with protagonists’ inner conflicts, while others focused on plot mechanics or on parallels to local political disputes.
Question: Which statement is best supported by synthesizing information throughout the passage?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to synthesize information across the passage by integrating literary claims with circulation, marketing, and reader evidence. Synthesis requires combining facts or claims from different sections, like formal features with social practices and responses. The first paragraph links novels to interiority, but the second cautions via social circulation. The third adds marketing frames, and the fourth reveals varied reader focuses. Combining these supports choice B, showing both introspective and social experiences beyond interiority. A distractor like A overstates from the first without synthesizing social contexts in the second. C misinterprets marketing from the third, ignoring psychological identifications in the fourth.
Passage: In discussions of language change, prescriptive commentators often portray new usages as signs of decline, implying that a language has a correct, stable form that is being corrupted. The passage evaluates this view by contrasting it with a descriptive perspective, which treats variation and change as normal features of living languages. The author notes that standards can be socially useful: shared conventions facilitate communication in formal settings and can reduce ambiguity. Yet the passage argues that elevating one variety as inherently superior often reflects historical power relations rather than linguistic necessity, and it can stigmatize speakers whose dialects differ from the standard. The author concludes that a balanced approach recognizes the practical role of standards while rejecting the notion that change itself is evidence of decay.
Question: The author’s main objective is to…
Explanation: This question tests primary purpose, asking for the author's main objective in discussing language change. A correct answer must identify the specific evaluative argument being made rather than just stating the topic. The passage develops its argument by contrasting prescriptive views (which see change as decline) with descriptive views (which see change as normal), then evaluating both perspectives. The author acknowledges the utility of standards for formal communication while rejecting the notion that language change represents decay, ultimately advocating for a balanced approach. Choice D correctly identifies this primary purpose by stating the author evaluates prescriptive and descriptive views while acknowledging standard utility but disputing that change signals decline. Choice C is too vague and merely identifies the topic, while choice B misrepresents the author's position by suggesting standards should be eliminated, when the passage actually acknowledges their practical value.
A study of workplace communication found that teams using an internal chat platform sent more messages per employee after the company encouraged “transparent communication.” Yet, in those same teams, the number of documented decisions recorded in project-management software declined. The study also noted that many teams began using chat threads to make quick decisions and that fewer employees updated the project-management tool unless a manager requested it. Which of the following, if true, best resolves the apparent discrepancy?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to resolve a paradox by identifying an explanation that reconciles two seemingly contradictory facts. Paradox questions require finding a choice that accounts for both the increased messages from the chat platform and the decline in documented decisions. The correct answer explains that decisions shifted to undocumented chat, boosting messages but reducing formal records. This accounts for the encouragement's effect by allowing more communication, while tool usage explains fewer documentations. Thus, it resolves the paradox by showing a medium shift. In contrast, choice A addresses connectivity but fails to explain declining decisions with more messages. Similarly, choice C notes dislikes but does not reconcile increased communication with reduced documentation.
Read the passage and answer the question.
Economists often defend congestion pricing—charging drivers a fee to enter crowded urban zones—by emphasizing efficiency. When roads are free at the point of use, each driver ignores the delay imposed on others; a price, the argument goes, forces drivers to account for that social cost and reallocates scarce road space to trips that are most valued.
Opponents counter that the policy is regressive: wealthier drivers can pay the fee while lower-income commuters may be priced out. They also argue that public transit alternatives are frequently inadequate, so the “choice” to avoid the fee is illusory. In this view, congestion pricing looks less like a corrective tool and more like a penalty on those with the fewest options.
A third position reframes the dispute by focusing on revenue use. If proceeds are returned as targeted rebates, or invested in transit improvements that specifically serve affected commuters, the regressive burden can be reduced or even reversed. Thus the central question becomes not whether pricing is inherently fair, but whether the surrounding fiscal design aligns efficiency gains with distributive goals.
The primary function of the second paragraph is to:
Explanation: This question tests passage structure and organization by examining the function of a middle paragraph in developing the argument. Structure involves understanding how each section contributes to the overall purpose rather than merely summarizing content. The second paragraph introduces the fairness-based objection that congestion pricing is regressive and penalizes those with fewer options. This objection creates the need for the third paragraph's reframing around revenue design, which shows how the policy could address distributional concerns. Choice B correctly identifies this structural function: the fairness objection sets up the subsequent discussion of how revenue use can mitigate regressive effects. Choice C incorrectly claims the paragraph provides examples of successful implementations, when it actually presents theoretical objections.
Read the passage and answer the question.
A marine biologist claims that artificial reef structures increase local fish biodiversity. The biologist cites a two-year monitoring project in which divers conducted monthly visual counts at 12 artificial reef sites and 12 nearby sandy-bottom control sites. Across the project, the artificial reef sites averaged 22 species per survey, while the sandy controls averaged 14. The biologist also notes that several species observed at the artificial reefs were juvenile stages of commercially important fish. However, the monitoring report states that the artificial reefs were placed closer to existing natural rock outcrops than the control sites were, because of permitting constraints.
The evidence in the passage primarily serves to
Explanation: This question tests evaluating how evidence functions in supporting a biodiversity claim. Evidence evaluation requires examining both what the data shows and what limitations or confounding factors might affect interpretation. The passage presents comparative data showing higher species counts at artificial reef sites (22 species) versus sandy controls (14 species), which aligns with the claim about increased biodiversity. The Borrect answer (B) accurately characterizes this evidence as 'comparative observations consistent with the claim' while crucially noting that artificial reefs were placed closer to natural rock outcrops, which could influence the results independently of the artificial structures. Answer A incorrectly claims the evidence demonstrates causation 'beyond doubt' when a confounding placement factor is explicitly mentioned, while Answer D dismisses valid observational methods without justification.
Read the passage and answer the question.
A linguistics dissertation reports an eye-tracking study on sentence processing conducted with 72 native speakers of German. Participants read 48 experimental sentences and 96 filler sentences presented in a randomized order. The passage states that each sentence was displayed in a single line of black 14-point font on a gray background, and that participants were seated 60 centimeters from the monitor. Eye movements were recorded at 1000 Hz using a desktop-mounted tracker, and calibration was repeated whenever average error exceeded 0.5 degrees of visual angle. The dissertation also notes that comprehension questions followed exactly one-third of the trials and that participants responded using a two-button response box. For analysis, the author excluded fixations shorter than 80 milliseconds and removed trials in which track loss occurred for more than 25% of the sentence. Finally, the passage specifies that the study was approved by the university’s ethics committee in March 2022.
Which of the following is mentioned in the passage?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to identify specific details mentioned in the passage. The correct answer must be information explicitly stated in the text without requiring inference. The passage explicitly states that "Eye movements were recorded at 1000 Hz using a desktop-mounted tracker," making option B the correct answer. This technical specification about the recording frequency is presented as a factual detail of the experimental methodology. Option C is incorrect because the passage states calibration was repeated "whenever average error exceeded 0.5 degrees," not after every trial regardless of error.
A town council states: "We should ban food trucks in the downtown area because downtown restaurants have reported lower revenue since food trucks became more common. Since protecting restaurant revenue is essential to a vibrant downtown, banning food trucks will restore downtown vitality." Which of the following identifies a flaw in the argument's reasoning?
Explanation: This question tests evaluating argument logic by identifying flaws in causal reasoning about economic relationships. Sound reasoning requires considering multiple potential causes for observed effects, especially in complex economic situations. The council observes that restaurant revenue declined after food trucks became common and immediately concludes that food trucks caused the decline, then further concludes that banning them will restore vitality. However, this reasoning fails to consider other factors that might explain lower restaurant revenue, such as economic downturns, changing consumer preferences, increased competition from delivery apps, or restaurants' own pricing and quality issues. Choice A correctly identifies this flaw by noting that the argument assumes food trucks are the main cause without considering other explanatory factors. Choice C incorrectly claims the argument is logically valid because declines must have single causes, when in reality complex phenomena like revenue changes typically have multiple contributing factors.
A publishing house compared two approaches to editing: a traditional process and a new workflow that uses software to flag consistency issues before human review. In a six-month trial, books edited under the new workflow had 25% fewer post-publication corrections, and overall editing time per manuscript fell by 10%. Since the software license costs less than the labor savings from reduced editing time, the house should adopt the new workflow for all nonfiction titles. Which of the following best states the conclusion of the argument?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to identify an argument’s conclusion in a GRE Verbal Reasoning context. Conclusions are the main claims or recommendations that the argument aims to establish, while premises are the supporting evidence or reasons provided to justify that claim. The passage compares editing workflows, noting fewer corrections and time savings with the new method. It then weighs the software cost against labor savings, leading to an adoption recommendation for nonfiction. Choice C best states the conclusion because it directly conveys the argument’s advice to implement the new workflow for efficiency gains. In contrast, choice A is merely a premise, providing data on corrections as evidence without being the main claim. Similarly, choice B serves as time-related evidence but does not represent the overall recommendation.
A coastal town is considering whether to restore a nearby wetland. Environmental scientists report that the wetland historically absorbed storm surge and that towns with similar restorations experienced lower flood-repair costs over the following decade. Although restoration has a high upfront price, the town’s finance office estimates that avoided repairs would exceed the project cost within twelve years. Therefore, the town should proceed with wetland restoration as a fiscally prudent flood-mitigation strategy. The main point of the argument is that…
Explanation: This question tests the ability to identify an argument’s conclusion in a GRE Verbal Reasoning context. Conclusions are the main claims or recommendations that the argument aims to establish, while premises are the supporting evidence or reasons provided to justify that claim. The passage discusses wetlands’ flood-absorbing role and data from similar restorations, then compares upfront costs to long-term savings. It builds to a fiscal justification for proceeding with restoration. Choice C best states the conclusion because it encapsulates the argument’s primary assertion that restoration is worthwhile due to net savings. Conversely, choice A is merely a premise, stating wetlands’ benefits as supporting evidence rather than the conclusion. Likewise, choice B highlights a counterpoint on costs but does not capture the argument’s resolution.
In a longitudinal study of sleep, researchers found that participants who reported drinking coffee in the afternoon had, on average, shorter total sleep time. Yet the same participants also scored higher on next-day attention tests than participants who avoided afternoon coffee. The study noted that coffee drinkers were more likely to report a brief nap earlier in the day and were more likely to have flexible work schedules. Which of the following, if true, best resolves the apparent discrepancy?
Explanation: This question tests the ability to resolve a paradox by identifying an explanation that reconciles two seemingly contradictory facts. Paradox questions require finding a choice that accounts for both the shorter sleep time among afternoon coffee drinkers and their higher attention scores. The correct answer explains that coffee drinkers used naps and flexible schedules to offset sleep loss, improving attention despite less nighttime sleep. This accounts for the sleep reduction by allowing caffeine's disruptive effect, while adaptive behaviors explain better performance. Thus, it resolves the paradox by introducing compensating strategies that enhance alertness. In contrast, choice A addresses underreporting but fails to explain higher scores with less sleep. Similarly, choice B notes individual differences but does not reconcile the group-level sleep and attention findings.
For each blank select one entry from the corresponding column of choices. Fill all blanks in the way that best completes the text.. The answer choices are grouped by blank: choices A–C are candidates for Blank (i); choices D–F are candidates for Blank (ii); and if there is a third blank, choices G–I are candidates for Blank (iii).
While the CEO publicly framed the merger as (i) , internal memos reveal a far more (ii) motivation: eliminating a rival before it could attract additional investment.
Explanation: This is a multi-blank Text Completion exploring the contrast between public presentation and private reality. The sentence uses 'While...reveal' to establish opposition between the CEO's public framing and actual motivation. The first blank needs 'altruistic' (A)—presenting the merger as benefiting others selflessly. This contrasts with 'strategic' (E) motivation revealed in memos, showing calculated self-interest in eliminating competition. The pairing exposes corporate hypocrisy: public altruism masking private strategy. 'Inevitable' (B) wouldn't create meaningful contrast with strategic planning, while 'disinterested' (D) means impartial rather than calculating, failing to capture the competitive elimination motive that drives the sentence's exposé structure.
Read the passage and answer the question.
A political science article analyzes archival records from a 1974 parliamentary committee in order to track how amendments were negotiated. The author examined 312 pages of meeting minutes stored in a national archive and cross-referenced them with 46 newspaper articles published during the same month. The passage specifies that the committee met on five dates—March 4, March 7, March 11, March 18, and March 25—and that the March 11 session lasted 6 hours, longer than any other session. The author notes that only two members spoke in every meeting and that the chair formally called for a vote on three amendments, all of which passed. In describing limitations, the passage states that audio recordings were not available and that the minutes occasionally omitted the names of speakers when multiple people interrupted each other.
Which of the following is mentioned in the passage?
Explanation: This question requires identifying a detail that is explicitly mentioned in the passage. The correct answer must reflect information stated directly in the text rather than requiring inference. The passage explicitly states that "the March 11 session lasted 6 hours, longer than any other session," making option B the correct answer. This specific detail about the duration of one particular committee meeting is presented as a factual statement. Option C is incorrect because the passage states that "the chair formally called for a vote on three amendments, all of which passed," contradicting the claim that all three amendments failed.
A technology columnist claims that the only reason people worry about data privacy is that they do not understand how encryption works. Therefore, the columnist concludes, public concern about data privacy would disappear if schools required a basic course on encryption. The argument relies on which questionable reasoning pattern?
Explanation: This question tests the evaluation of argument logic by identifying oversimplifications in causal explanations. Sound reasoning addresses multifaceted issues with nuanced causes, whereas flawed reasoning attributes complex problems to a single factor. The columnist claims privacy worries stem only from misunderstanding encryption, concluding education would eliminate concerns. This treats privacy as having one cause, ignoring other reasons like data misuse or surveillance. Choice A correctly characterizes this questionable pattern. In contrast, choice E is a distractor that distorts the argument's conclusion about worry. Additionally, choice B fails as the argument does not rely on broad empirical studies.
A professor argues that because students who attend office hours usually earn higher grades than those who do not, the professor’s office hours are the primary reason those students succeed. Therefore, the professor concludes, the department should require all students to attend office hours weekly to raise overall grades. The argument is most vulnerable to which criticism?
Explanation: This question tests evaluating argument logic by identifying selection biases in correlations. Sound reasoning accounts for pre-existing differences, whereas flawed reasoning attributes outcomes to interventions without such consideration. The professor notes higher grades among office hour attendees and concludes attendance causes success. This overlooks that motivated students may be more likely to attend, so attendance may not cause grades. Choice A accurately critiques this by highlighting potential self-selection. Conversely, choice C is a distractor as the argument does not question grades as a measure. Additionally, choice E fails because the argument does not claim equal benefits for all.
A coastal town proposes building a seawall to prevent future flood damage. Town officials argue that because a smaller seawall built near the harbor five years ago has not been overtopped during storms since its construction, a larger seawall along the entire coastline will protect residential areas as well. They conclude that investing in the seawall is the most effective way to reduce flood-related repair costs over the next decade. Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?
Explanation: This question asks you to weaken an argument that a larger seawall will protect the entire coastline based on a smaller harbor seawall's success. Weakening requires showing why the harbor's success might not translate to the broader coastline. The officials assume that because the harbor seawall hasn't been overtopped in five years, a similar structure will work equally well everywhere along the coast. The Borrect answer (B) reveals a crucial difference: the harbor is sheltered by offshore rock formations while much of the coastline faces open-ocean waves. This means the harbor seawall faced much less severe conditions than a coastal seawall would face, making the comparison invalid and seriously undermining the conclusion. Choice A about resident preferences doesn't address effectiveness, while choice C about maintenance needs doesn't challenge whether the seawall would actually prevent flooding.
Read the passage and answer the question.
A literary journal article compared two annotated editions of a 17th-century play. Edition R, published in 1998, included 214 footnotes and a 36-page introduction. Edition S, published in 2016, included 287 footnotes and a 22-page introduction. The article stated that both editions modernized spelling in the main text but retained original punctuation in stage directions. It also noted that Edition S added a glossary of 140 terms, while Edition R did not include a glossary. The author of the article observed that Edition R’s notes more frequently cited contemporary pamphlets, but the article did not provide counts of those citations.
Which of the following is mentioned in the passage?
Explanation: This question tests detail comprehension by asking which statement is mentioned in the passage. Correct answers in such questions restate explicit information from the text without adding inferences or external knowledge. The relevant detail is in the third sentence, which compares the footnotes in the editions. This sentence states that Edition S included 287 footnotes. Choice B matches this text by identifying Edition S and the exact footnote count. A representative distractor, like choice D, fails because it claims the article provided exact counts of pamphlet citations, but the passage notes only that Edition R cited them more frequently without providing counts. This distractor adds unstated specifics.