HERE IS HOW TO APPROACH LOGICAL THINKING:
1) Preview the question stem.
2) Read the stimulus.
3) Try to pre-phrase an answer.
4) Choose an answer.
1. Preview the Question Stem
Previewing the stem is a great way to focus your reading of the stimulus, so that you know exactly what you're looking for.
2. Read the Stimulus
With the question stem in mind, read the stimulus, paraphrasing as you go. Remember to read actively and critically, pinpointing evidence and conclusion.
3. Try to Pre-phrase an Answer
Sometimes, if you've read the stimulus critically enough, you'll know the answer without even looking at the choices.
4. Choose an Answer
If you were able to pre-phrase an answer, skim the choices looking for something that sounds like what you have in mind. If you couldn't think of anything, read and evaluate each choice, throwing out the ones that are outside the scope of the argument. After settling on an answer, you may wish to briefly double-check the question stem to make sure that you're indeed answering the question that was asked. Now let’s try this approach on a genuine Logical Reasoning item:
A study of twenty overweight men reveled that each man experienced significant with loss after adding SlimDown, an artificial food supplement, to his daily diet. For three months, each man consumed one Slim Down portion every morning after exercising, and then followed his normal diet for the rest of the day. Clearly, anyone who consumes one portion of SlimDown every day for at least three months will lose weight and will look and feel his or her best.
Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The men in the study will regain the weight they lost if they discontinue the SlimDown program.
(B) No other dietary supplement will have the same effect on overweight men.
(C) The daily exercise regimen was not responsible for the effects noted in the study.
(D) Women will not experience similar weight reductions if they adhere to the SlimDown program for three months.
(E) Overweight men will achieve only partial weight loss if they do not remain on the SlimDown program for a full three months.
1. Preview the Question Stem
We see, quite clearly, that we're dealing with an assumption question. Good! Immediately we can adopt an "assumption mindset," which basically means before even reading the first word of the stimulus, we know that the conclusion will be lacking an important piece of supporting evidence. We now turn to the stimulus, already on the lookout for this missing link.
2. Read the Stimulus
The first sentence introduces a study of twenty men using a food supplement product, resulting in weight loss for all twenty. The second sentence describes how they used it: once a day, for three months, after morning exercise. So far so good; it feels as if we're building up to something. The structural signal word clearly usually indicates that some sort of conclusion follows, and in fact it does: the author concludes in the third sentence that anyone who has one portion of the product daily for three months will lose weight, too.
You must read critically! Notice that the conclusion doesn't say that anyone who follows the same routine as the twenty men will have the same results; it says that anyone who simply consumes the product in the same way will have the same results. The evidence in the second sentence describes a routine that includes taking the supplement after daily exercise, whereas the conclusion focuses primarily on the supplement and entirely ignores the part about the exercise. The conclusion, therefore, doesn't stem logically from the evidence in the first two sentences. This blends seamlessly into Step 3.
3. Pre-phrase an Answer
As expected, the argument is beginning to look as if it has a serious shortcoming. Of course, we expected this because we previewed the question stem before reading the stimulus.
In really simplistic terms, the argument proceeds like so: "A bunch of guys did A and B for three months, and had X result. If anyone does A for three months, that person will experience X result, too." Sound a little fishy? You bet. The author must be assuming that A (the product), not B (exercise), must be the crucial thing that leads to the result. If not (the Denial Test), the conclusion makes no sense.
So, you might prephrase the answer like this: "Something about the exercise thing needs to be cleared up." That's it. Did you think your prephrasing had to be something fancy and glamorous? Well, it doesn't. All you need is an inkling of what the question is looking for, and in this case, it just seems that if we don't shore up the exercise issue, the argument will remain invalid and incomplete. So, with our vague idea of a possible assumption, we can turn to Step 4, which is…
4. Choose an Answer
Since we were able to prephrase something, it's best to skim the choices looking for it. And, lo and behold, there's our idea, stated, in choice (C). (C) clears up the exercise issue. Yes, this author must assume (C) to make the conclusion that eating SlimDown alone will cause anyone to lose weight.
At this point, if you're stuck for time, you simply choose (C) and move on. If you have more time, you may as well quickly check the remaining choices, to find (hopefully) that none of them fits the bill.
Of course, once you grasp the structure of the argument and have located the author's central assumption, you should be able to answer any question they throw at you.
Which one of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the argument above?
Answer: Daily exercise contributed significantly to the weight loss experienced by the men in the study.
And here's a flaw question that could have been based on the same stimulus:
The author's reasoning is flawed because it…
Answer - … overlooks the possibility that the results noted in the study were caused by daily exercise rather than by the consumption of SlimDown
Thank you SOOOO much.
UMAT is next week. so excited and anxious..