Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Introduction to Analogous Reasoning Questions - Coggle Diagram
Introduction to Analogous Reasoning Questions
Definition: Questions that require identifying arguments with similar structure or flaws as the given squib.
Difficulty: Considered the hardest in the Logical Reasoning section, requiring more time to solve.
Strategy: Avoid skipping; practice recognizing patterns to improve accuracy and score.
Types of Analogous Reasoning Questions
Flaw-Based Questions
Task: Identify an answer choice with a flaw similar to the squib’s.
Example: Squib about a suitor assuming inevitable marriage based on short-term events (flaw: long-term assumption from short-term evidence).
Answer Choices: Options mirror the same logical error (e.g., assuming permanence from temporary success).
Structure-Based Questions
Task: Select an answer choice with the same logical structure as the squib.
Example: Squib about the Whigs’ historical success implying success for a modern band with the same name.
Answer Choices: Options replicate the structure (e.g., success of one entity with a name implies success for another with the same name).
Guidelines for Comparing Logical Arguments
Arguments stating something will happen are less probable than those stating something will not happen.
Arguments about possibilities are less probable than those about certainties.
Less-supported arguments are not comparable to well-supported ones.
Different types of sufficient-necessary logic chains are not comparable.
Common Traits of Analogous Reasoning Questions
General Format
Squibs are 2–5 sentences.
Questions present an argument (flawed or valid) and ask for a matching argument in structure or flaw.
Sample Question Stems
“Which one of the following has a logical structure most like that of the argument above?”
“Which one of the following exhibits the same flaw as the argument above?”
“Which one of the following most closely parallels the reasoning in the argument above?”
Correct Answer Characteristics
Matches the squib’s method or logical error.
Second-Best Choice Characteristics
Uses qualifiers (e.g., “possibly”) when the squib is definitive.
Presents an inverse or opposite relationship to the squib.
Clearly Wrong Answers
Differ significantly in characteristics from the squib.
Are flawed when the squib is valid, or vice versa.
Sample Questions and Analysis
Question 1: Bank Robbery (Flaw-Based)
Squib: Concludes capture without accounting for a fast getaway car (flaw: ignoring alternative condition).
Correct Answer (A): Exterminator assumes termite reinfestation without considering a second chemical.
Question 2: Teenager Social Skills (Structure-Based)
Squib: Uses contrapositive logic (no exemplary social skills → not a well-adjusted teenager).
Correct Answer (E): Penguin’s failure to lay two eggs → no evolutionary success (same contrapositive structure).
Question 3: Comedian (Flaw-Based)
Squib: Assumes having a sense of humor makes one a comedian (flaw: reverses sufficient-necessary logic).
Correct Answer (A): Assumes aggression makes one a sports player (same reversal flaw).
Question 4: Hard Work and Fulfillment (Structure-Based)
Squib: Chains sufficient-necessary conditions (hard work → success → fulfillment).
Correct Answer (A): Religion study → spirituality → less crime (same chained logic).
Question 5: Gorilla Sign Language (Flaw-Based)
Squib: Assumes learning sign language makes a primate a gorilla (flaw: converse error).
Correct Answer (C): Assumes an angel calling makes it a cherub (same converse error).
Question 6: Jirtha Commoner (Structure-Based)
Squib: Uses contrapositive (not forced into war zone → Jirtha commoner).
Correct Answer: Not provided, but requires matching contrapositive structure.
Question 7: Lincoln’s Presidency (Flaw-Based, Exception)
Squib: Assumes prosocial activities mean Lincoln encouraged peace (flaw: converse error).
Correct Answer (D): Unlike others, it does not commit the converse error.
Strategies for Solving
Analyze Squib First: Identify the reasoning strategy or flaw before reviewing answer choices.
Use Diagramming: Map sufficient-necessary conditions to clarify logic.
Eliminate Incorrect Choices: Use guidelines to quickly rule out answers with different structures or flaws.
Practice Pattern Recognition: Familiarity with common flaws (e.g., converse errors, hasty generalizations) improves efficiency.