logic and critical thinking test indeed answers

Get 25% off all test packages.

Get 25% off all test packages!

Click below to get 25% off all test packages.

Critical Thinking Tests

228 questions

Critical thinking tests, sometimes known as critical reasoning tests, are often used by employers. They evaluate how a candidate makes logical deductions after scrutinising the evidence provided, while avoiding fallacies or non-factual opinions. Critical thinking tests can form part of an assessment day, or be used as a screening test before an interview.

What is a critical thinking test?

A critical thinking test assesses your ability to use a range of logical skills to evaluate given information and make a judgement. The test is presented in such a way that candidates are expected to quickly scrutinise the evidence presented and decide on the strength of the arguments.

Critical thinking tests show potential employers that you do not just accept data and can avoid subconscious bias and opinions – instead, you can find logical connections between ideas and find alternative interpretations.

This test is usually timed, so quick, clear, logical thinking will help candidates get the best marks. Critical thinking tests are designed to be challenging, and often used as part of the application process for upper-management-level roles.

What does critical thinking mean?

Critical thinking is the intellectual skill set that ensures you can process and consider information, challenge and analyse data, and then reach a conclusion that can be defended and justified.

In the most simple terms, critical reasoning skills will make sure that you are not simply accepting information at face value with little or no supporting evidence.

It also means that you are less likely to be swayed by ‘false news’ or opinions that cannot be backed with facts – which is important in high-level jobs that require logical thinking.

For more information about logical thinking, please see our article all about logical reasoning .

Which professions use critical thinking tests, and why?

Typically, critical thinking tests are taken as part of the application process for jobs that require advanced skills in judgement, analysis and decision making. The higher the position, the more likely that you will need to demonstrate reliable critical reasoning and good logic.

The legal sector is the main industry that uses critical thinking assessments – making decisions based on facts, without opinion and intuition, is vital in legal matters.

A candidate for a legal role needs to demonstrate their intellectual skills in problem-solving without pre-existing knowledge or subconscious bias – and the critical thinking test is a simple and effective way to screen candidates.

Another industry that uses critical thinking tests as part of the recruitment process is banking. In a similar way to the legal sector, those that work in banking are required to make decisions without allowing emotion, intuition or opinion to cloud coherent analysis and conclusions.

Critical thinking tests also sometimes comprise part of the recruitment assessment for graduate and management positions across numerous industries.

The format of the test: which skills are tested?

The test itself, no matter the publisher, is multiple choice.

As a rule, the questions present a paragraph of information for a scenario that may include numerical data. There will then be a statement and a number of possible answers.

The critical thinking test is timed, so decisions need to be made quickly and accurately; in most tests there is a little less than a minute for each question. Having experience of the test structure and what each question is looking for will make the experience smoother for you.

There are typically five separate sections in a critical thinking test, and each section may have multiple questions.

Inference questions assess your ability to judge whether a statement is true, false, or impossible to determine based on the given data and scenario. You usually have five possible answers: absolutely true, absolutely false, possibly true, possibly false, or not possible to determine.

Assumptions

In this section, you are being assessed on your ability to avoid taking things for granted. Each question gives a scenario including data, and you need to evaluate whether there are any assumptions present.

Here you are given a scenario and a number of deductions that may be applicable. You need to assess the given deductions to see which is the logical conclusion – does it follow?

Interpretation

In the interpretation stage, you need to read and analyse a paragraph of information, then interpret a set of possible conclusions, to see which one is correct. You are looking for the conclusion that follows beyond reasonable doubt.

Evaluation of Arguments

In this section, you are given a scenario and a set of arguments that can be for or against. You need to determine which are strong arguments and which are weak, in terms of the information that you have. This decision is made based on the way they address the scenario and how relevant they are to the content.

How best to prepare for a critical thinking test

The best way to prepare for any type of aptitude test is to practice, and critical thinking tests are no different.

Taking practice tests, as mentioned above, will give you confidence as it makes you better understand the structure, layout and timing of the real tests, so you can concentrate on the actual scenarios and questions.

Practice tests should be timed. This will help you get used to working through the scenarios and assessing the conclusions under time constraints – which is a good way to make sure that you perform quickly as well as accurately.

In some thinking skills assessments , a timer will be built in, but you might need to time yourself.

Consistent practice will also enable you to pinpoint any areas of the critical thinking test that require improvement. Our tests offer explanations for each answer, similar to the examples provided above.

Publishers of critical thinking tests

The watson glaser critical thinking test.

The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (W-GCTA) is the most popular and widely used critical thinking test. This test has been in development for 85 years and is published by TalentLens .

The W-GCTA is seen as a successful tool for assessing cognitive abilities, allowing recruiting managers to predict job success, find good managers and identify future leaders. It is available in multiple languages including English, French and Spanish.

The test itself can be used as part of an assessment day or as a screening assessment before an interview. It consists of 40 questions on the 5 sections mentioned above, and is timed at 30 minutes. Click here for more information on Watson Glaser tests .

SHL critical reasoning test

SHL is a major aptitude test publisher, which offers critical thinking as part of its testing battery for pre-employment checks.

SHL tests cover all kinds of behavioural and aptitude tests, from logic to inference, verbal to numerical – and with a number of test batteries available online, they are one of the most popular choices for recruiters.

Cornell critical thinking test

The Cornell critical thinking test was made to test students and first developed in 1985. It is an American system that helps teachers, parents and administrators to confidently predict future performance for college admission, gifted and advanced placement programs, and even career success.

Prepare yourself for leading employers

5 Example critical thinking practice questions with answers

In this section, you need to deduce whether the inferred statement is true, false or impossible to deduce.

The UK Government has published data that shows 82% of people under the age of 30 are not homeowners. A charity that helps homeless people has published data that shows 48% of people that are considered homeless are under 30.

The lack of affordable housing on the sales market is the reason so many under-30s are homeless.

Definitely True
Probably True
Impossible to Deduce
Probably False
Definitely False

The information given does not infer the conclusion given, so it is impossible to deduce if the inference is correct – there is just not enough information to judge the inference as correct.

The removal of the five-substitution rule in British football will benefit clubs with a smaller roster.

Clubs with more money would prefer the five-substitute rule to continue.

Assumption Made

Assumption Not Made

This is an example of a fallacy that could cause confusion for a candidate – it encourages you to bring in any pre-existing knowledge of football clubs.

It would be easy to assume the assumption has been made when you consider that the more money a club has, the more players they should have on the roster. However, the statement does not make the assumption that the clubs with more money would prefer to continue with the five-substitute rule.

All boys love football. Football is a sport, therefore:

All boys love all sports
Girls do not love football
Boys are more likely to choose to play football than any other sport

In this section we are looking for the conclusion that follows the logic of the statement. In this example, we cannot deduce that girls do not love football, because there is not enough information to support that.

In the same way the conclusion that all boys love all sports does not follow – we are not given enough information to make that assumption. So, the conclusion that follows is 3: boys are more likely to choose football than any other sport because all boys like football.

The British Museum has a range of artefacts on display, including the largest privately owned collection of WWII weaponry.

There is a larger privately owned collection of WWII weaponry in the USA.

Conclusion Follows

Conclusion Does Not Follow

The fact that the collection is in the British Museum does not make a difference to the fact it is the largest private collection – so there cannot be a larger collection elsewhere.

The Department for Education should lower standards in examinations to make it fairer for less able students.

Yes – top grades are too hard for lower-income students
No – less fortunate students are not capable of higher standards
Yes – making the standards lower will benefit all students
No – private school students will suffer if grade standards are lower
The strongest argument is the right answer, not the one that you might personally believe.

In this case, we need to assess which argument is most relevant to the statement. Both 1 and 4 refer to students in particular situations, which isn’t relevant to the statement. The same can be said about 2, so the strongest argument is 3, since it is relevant and addresses the statement given.

Sample Critical Thinking Tests question Test your knowledge!

What implication can be drawn from the information in the passage?

A company’s internal audit revealed that departments with access to advanced analytics tools reported higher levels of strategic decision-making. These departments also showed a higher rate of reaching their quarterly objectives.

Strategic decision-making has no link to the achievement of quarterly objectives.
Access to advanced analytics does not influence a department's ability to make strategic decisions.
Advanced analytics tools are the sole reason for departments reaching their quarterly objectives.
Departments without access to advanced analytics tools are unable to make strategic decisions.
Advanced analytics tools may facilitate better strategic decision-making, which can lead to the achievement of objectives.

After reading the passage below, what conclusion is best supported by the information provided?

Job satisfaction increases when employees start their day earlier.
Starting early may lead to more efficient task completion and less job-related stress.
Workers who start their day later are more efficient at completing tasks.
There is a direct correlation between job satisfaction and starting work early.
The study concludes that job-related stress is unaffected by the start time of the workday.

Based on the passage below, which of the following assumptions is implicit?

Inter-departmental cooperation is the sole factor influencing project completion rates.
The increase in project completion rates is due entirely to the specialized team-building module.
Team-building exercises have no effect on inter-departmental cooperation.
The specialized team-building module may contribute to improvements in inter-departmental cooperation.
Departments that have not undergone the training will experience a decrease in project completion rates.

What is the flaw in the argument presented in the passage below?

The assumption that a casual dress code is suitable for all company types.
High-tech companies have a casual dress code to increase employee productivity specifically.
The argument correctly suggests that a casual dress code will increase employee morale in every company.
Morale and productivity cannot be affected by a company's dress code.
A casual dress code is more important than other factors in determining a company's success.

Which statement is an inference that can be drawn from the passage below?

Telecommuting employees are less productive than on-site workers.
The reduction in operational costs is directly caused by the increase in telecommuting employees.
Telecommuting may have contributed to the decrease in operational costs.
Operational costs are unaffected by employee work locations.
The number of telecommuting employees has no impact on operational costs.

Start your success journey

Access one of our Watson Glaser tests for FREE.

After using the platform for two weeks, I’ve never felt more prepared for an Aptitude test.

Ethan used Practice Aptitude Tests to improve his situational judgement scores.

Hire better talent

At Neuroworx we help companies build perfect teams

Critical Thinking Tests Tips

The most important factor in your success will be practice. If you have taken some practice tests, not only will you start to recognise the way questions are worded and become familiar with what each question is looking for, you will also be able to find out whether there are any parts that you need extra practice with.

It is important to find out which test you will be taking, as some generic critical thinking practice tests might not help if you are taking specific publisher tests (see the section below).

2 Fact vs fallacy

Practice questions can also help you recognise the difference between fact and fallacy in the test. A fallacy is simply an error or something misleading in the scenario paragraph that encourages you to choose an invalid argument. This might be a presumption or a misconception, but if it isn’t spotted it can make finding the right answer impossible.

3 Ignore what you already know

There is no need for pre-existing knowledge to be brought into the test, so no research is needed. In fact, it is important that you ignore any subconscious bias when you are considering the questions – you need logic and facts to get the correct answer, not intuition or instinct.

4 Read everything carefully

Read all the given information thoroughly. This might sound straightforward, but knowing that the test is timed can encourage candidates to skip content and risk misunderstanding the content or miss crucial details.

During the test itself, you will receive instructions that will help you to understand what is being asked of you on each section. There is likely to be an example question and answer, so ensure you take the time to read them fully.

5 Stay aware of the time you've taken

This test is usually timed, so don’t spend too long on a question. If you feel it is going to take too much time, leave it and come back to it at the end (if you have time). Critical thinking tests are complex by design, so they do have quite generous time limits.

For further advice, check out our full set of tips for critical thinking tests .

Prepare for your Watson Glaser Test

Immediate access. Cancel anytime.

30 Numerical reasoning tests
30 Verbal reasoning tests
30 Diagrammatic reasoning tests
30 Situational judgement tests
34 Publisher packages e.g. Watson Glaser
252 Employer packages e.g. HSBC
29 Extra packages e.g Mechanical
Dashboard performance tracking
Full solutions and explanations
Tips, tricks, guides and resources
Access to free tests
Basic performance tracking
Solutions & explanations
Tips and resources

Critical Thinking Tests FAQs

What are the basics of critical thinking.

In essence, critical thinking is the intellectual process of considering information on its merits, and reaching an analysis or conclusion from that information that can be defended and rationalised with evidence.

How do you know if you have good critical thinking skills?

You are likely to be someone with good critical thinking skills if you can build winning arguments; pick holes in someone’s theory if it’s inconsistent with known facts; reflect on the biases inherent in your own experiences and assumptions; and look at problems using a systematic methodology.

Reviews of our Watson Glaser tests

What our customers say about our Watson Glaser tests

Jozef Bailey

United Kingdom

April 05, 2022

Doesn't cover all aspects of Watson-Glaser tests but useful

The WGCTA uses more categories to assess critical thinking, but this was useful for the inference section.

April 01, 2022

Just practicing for an interview

Good information and liked that it had a countdown clock, to give you that real feel in the test situation.

Jerico Kadhir

March 31, 2022

Aptitude test

It was OK, I didn't understand personally whether or not the "cannot say" option was acceptable or not in a lot of the questions, as it may have been a trick option.

Salvarina Viknesuari

March 15, 2022

I like the test because the platform is simple and engaging while the test itself is different than most of the Watson Glaser tests I've taken.

Alexis Sheridan

March 02, 2022

Some of the ratios were harder than I thought!

I like how clear the design and layout is - makes things very easy (even if the content itself is not!)

Cyril Lekgetho

February 17, 2022

Mental arithmetic

I enjoyed the fact that there were multiple questions pertaining to one passage of information, rather than multiple passages. However I would've appreciated a more varied question type.

Madupoju Manish

February 16, 2022

Analytics are the best questions

I like the test because of its time schedule. The way the questions are prepared makes it easy to crack the original test.

Chelsea Franklin

February 02, 2022

Interesting

I haven't done something like this for ages. Very good for the brain - although I certainly experienced some fog whilst doing it.

[email protected]

January 04, 2022

Population/exchange rates were the hardest

Great test as it felt a bit time pressured. Very different types of questions in terms of difficulty.

faezeh tavakoli

January 02, 2022

More attention to detail + be more time conscious

It was asking about daily stuff we all deal with, but as an assessment it's scrutinising how we approach these problems.

By using our website you agree with our Cookie Policy.

Common Logical Thinking Interview Questions

1. how would you approach solving a problem where data contradicts your initial hypothesis.

Flexibility in thought and a commitment to evidence-based solutions are highly valued traits in a candidate. When faced with data that conflicts with an initial hypothesis, it’s important to demonstrate the ability to pivot and adapt in light of new information. This ability is essential for roles that demand critical thinking and innovation, as clinging to a disproven hypothesis can lead to ineffective strategies and a waste of resources.

To respond effectively, outline a systematic approach: Begin by re-evaluating the initial hypothesis and the data gathered, ensuring there are no errors in collection or analysis. Discuss the importance of remaining open to alternative explanations and the value of iterative testing. Emphasize the willingness to consult with colleagues or subject matter experts to gain different perspectives. Lastly, express a readiness to develop and test a new hypothesis that aligns with the available data, showcasing a logical and methodical mindset.

Example: “ When faced with data contradicting my initial hypothesis, my first step would be to conduct a thorough review of both the hypothesis and the data collection process. I would scrutinize the methodology for potential biases or errors, and re-examine the data analysis techniques used to ensure accuracy. This critical evaluation often reveals whether the discrepancy is due to a flaw in the hypothesis or in the data handling.

If the hypothesis is still viable after a rigorous review, I would then explore alternative explanations and engage in iterative testing. This involves formulating additional hypotheses that could account for the observed data and systematically evaluating each one. Collaboration with colleagues is essential during this phase to incorporate diverse insights and challenge my own biases. Should new patterns emerge, I would refine or pivot the hypothesis accordingly, demonstrating adaptability and a commitment to following the evidence where it leads.”

2. Describe a scenario in which you used deductive reasoning to make a decision.

For roles that require problem-solving and critical thinking, deductive reasoning is a key skill. This type of reasoning allows you to logically deduce the outcome of a situation based on a set of given premises. It is a test of mental agility and analytical skills, determining if you can move from the general to the specific effectively.

When responding, select a clear example where you started with a general rule or principle and applied it to a specific case to reach a logical conclusion. Outline the premises of your reasoning, the thought process you followed, and the outcome that resulted. Ensure that your example demonstrates a structured approach to decision-making and reflects your ability to use deductive reasoning in a practical context. Remember to articulate the situation succinctly, highlighting your analytical capabilities and decision-making prowess without becoming bogged down in unnecessary details.

Example: “ In a project that required optimizing a production process, I applied deductive reasoning to identify the root cause of a recurring bottleneck. The general principle was that if a machine operates beyond its capacity, then it will become a bottleneck. Upon analyzing the production data, I deduced that Machine X was consistently reaching capacity while others were underutilized.

With this premise, I hypothesized that redistributing the workload could alleviate the bottleneck. I implemented a trial where tasks were reallocated according to machine capabilities. This resulted in a smoother process flow and increased overall efficiency. The outcome validated the initial deduction, demonstrating that a logical, principle-based approach to problem-solving could effectively enhance operational performance.”

3. What strategies do you employ when faced with a complex problem lacking clear direction?

In roles where complex problem-solving is routine, demonstrating a structured approach to untangling intricate issues is crucial. The ability to remain composed and methodical when a clear path isn’t immediately evident reflects your proficiency in critical thinking and your potential to contribute to informed decision-making processes.

When responding to this question, focus on outlining a clear strategy that you typically follow. Mention how you break down the problem into smaller, more manageable parts, or how you gather and analyze relevant data to inform your approach. You might also discuss the importance of seeking diverse perspectives and expertise when necessary, as well as your willingness to pivot and adapt your strategy based on new information. It’s important to convey that your methods are not rigid but are instead flexible and responsive to the problem’s unique parameters.

Example: “ When confronted with a complex problem that lacks clear direction, my initial strategy is to deconstruct the issue into smaller, more digestible components. This segmentation allows for a focused analysis of each part, making the overall problem less daunting and more approachable. I prioritize these segments based on their potential impact and the feasibility of addressing them. Concurrently, I gather relevant data and perform a thorough analysis to inform my understanding of the problem space. This data-driven approach ensures that any subsequent hypothesis or solution is rooted in empirical evidence, which increases the likelihood of effectiveness.

In addition to breaking down the problem and analyzing data, I actively seek out diverse perspectives, recognizing that collaborative input can unveil novel solutions and expose blind spots in my own reasoning. This multidisciplinary approach enriches the problem-solving process with varied expertise and insights. Finally, I maintain an adaptive mindset, prepared to pivot strategies in light of new information or changing circumstances. By remaining agile, I ensure that the problem-solving approach is tailored to the evolving nature of the problem, which is crucial for navigating complex issues without clear direction.”

4. In what ways have you applied Occam’s Razor principle in real-life situations?

Understanding and applying Occam’s Razor can be a significant asset in problem-solving. This principle suggests that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one, and it is an essential tool for clear and efficient problem-solving. By inquiring about your use of Occam’s Razor, the focus is on your ability to cut through complexity and avoid unnecessary complications in your thought process.

When responding to this question, reflect on scenarios where you faced multiple explanations or solutions and chose the simplest one that still addressed the core issue. Discuss the situation, the options you considered, the rationale behind selecting the simplest approach, and the outcome. Be sure to emphasize your thought process and highlight the benefits of the chosen solution, such as saving time, resources, or reducing confusion among team members.

Example: “ In applying Occam’s Razor, I once encountered a project with a perplexing performance issue. The software had several potential culprits: a memory leak, inefficient database queries, or an overburdened server. After preliminary analysis, I resisted the temptation to overhaul the system or dive into the most complex theory. Instead, I hypothesized that optimizing the most frequently run queries could yield the most significant performance gains. This approach was the simplest and required the least amount of change to the existing system. By refining those queries, performance improved markedly, validating the principle that the simplest solution is often correct.

Another instance involved troubleshooting intermittent network outages affecting our operations. Theories ranged from hardware failure to software bugs or even external security breaches. Applying Occam’s Razor, I focused first on the most straightforward possibility—hardware issues. A systematic check revealed that a single faulty router was causing the outages. Replacing it resolved the problem without the need for extensive investigations into the other more complex and less likely scenarios. This not only saved time and resources but also minimized downtime, demonstrating the efficacy of Occam’s Razor in practical problem-solving.”

5. Can you provide an example of how you’ve utilized inductive reasoning in your professional experience?

Inductive reasoning is a particular form of logic where you infer general principles from specific observations. This skill is vital in roles that require pattern recognition, hypothesis formation, or trend prediction. The ability to learn from experience and apply that knowledge to new situations is a key component in problem-solving and strategic planning.

When responding to this question, you should reflect on a scenario where you observed specific details or patterns and derived a general rule or theory based on those observations. Explain the situation, the data or behavior you observed, the conclusion you reached, and how you applied this conclusion to achieve a successful outcome. Be sure to articulate the thought process that led you from observation to action, showcasing your ability to think critically and adaptively.

Example: “ In a project aimed at optimizing operational efficiency, I observed a recurring pattern where certain types of service requests had a higher incidence of delays. By analyzing the specific characteristics of these requests, I recognized they shared common variables such as the time of submission and the complexity of the task. Utilizing inductive reasoning, I hypothesized that the processing bottleneck was due to a combination of peak submission times and the allocation of insufficient resources to complex tasks.

With this hypothesis in mind, I proposed a restructuring of the workflow that included time-based triage and dynamic resource allocation. The implementation of these changes led to a significant reduction in turnaround times for the identified service requests. This outcome not only validated the hypothesis but also underscored the effectiveness of inductive reasoning in identifying and solving operational inefficiencies.”

6. Detail a time when you had to distinguish between correlation and causation in your work.

Discerning patterns and understanding the relationships between events or data points is a critical skill for effective decision-making. The ability to distinguish between correlation and causation is pivotal for making informed decisions that are based on sound reasoning rather than assumptions.

When responding to this question, provide a clear example from your professional experience where you encountered two or more factors that were interconnected. Explain the process you used to analyze the data or situation, including the tools or methods you employed to determine whether the relationship was one of correlation or causation. Emphasize the outcome of your analysis and the subsequent actions you took, ensuring to highlight the thought process that led you to your conclusion and the impact it had on the work or business decision.

Example: “ In a project analyzing customer behavior, I observed a strong correlation between the use of a specific feature in our software and high customer satisfaction scores. Initially, it appeared that the feature’s usage was driving satisfaction, but I recognized the need to establish causation to inform our product development strategy accurately.

To dissect this relationship, I employed a combination of A/B testing and regression analysis. The A/B test involved creating two user groups where one had enhanced access to the feature while the other group’s access remained unchanged. Simultaneously, regression analysis was used to control for confounding variables that could influence satisfaction scores, such as user demographics and usage patterns. The results from the A/B test showed no significant difference in satisfaction between the two groups, suggesting that while usage of the feature and satisfaction were correlated, the feature itself wasn’t the cause of increased satisfaction.

This analysis prompted a shift in focus towards other potential drivers of satisfaction, ultimately leading to a more targeted approach in our product enhancements and marketing efforts. The outcome was a more effective allocation of resources and an improvement in overall customer satisfaction, demonstrating the critical importance of distinguishing between correlation and causation in data-driven decision-making.”

7. What is your process for validating assumptions before making a critical decision?

When discussing how you validate assumptions, it’s important to show that you have a structured and analytical approach to decision-making. This involves gathering data, evaluating evidence, and considering alternative perspectives to ensure that decisions are not based on unverified beliefs or biases.

When responding, outline a clear, step-by-step approach that demonstrates your due diligence. You might start by explaining how you identify assumptions, then discuss the methods you use to test these assumptions, such as seeking out empirical data, consulting with knowledgeable colleagues, or running pilot programs. Articulate how you weigh the validity of different sources of information and how you pivot your strategy if an assumption proves incorrect. Emphasize your commitment to continuous learning and adaptation, showing that your decision-making process is both rigorous and flexible.

Example: “ To validate assumptions before making a critical decision, I start by clearly identifying each assumption and categorizing them based on their impact on the decision-making process. I then prioritize the assumptions for validation based on their potential to alter the outcome. For each assumption, I seek empirical data, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative research methods to gather evidence. This may involve analyzing existing data sets, conducting surveys, or engaging in targeted experiments.

Once I’ve collected data, I critically assess its reliability and relevance, considering the source’s credibility and the data’s alignment with the context of the decision. If an assumption is contradicted by the data, I explore alternative scenarios and adjust my decision framework accordingly. This iterative process ensures that my decisions are grounded in reality and informed by a robust analysis of the available evidence. It’s a dynamic approach that allows for adjustments as new information emerges, exemplifying my commitment to a rigorous yet adaptable decision-making process.”

8. Share an instance where you identified a logical fallacy in a team member’s argument and how you addressed it.

Spotting flaws in logic and addressing them constructively is a valuable skill in any professional environment. This question delves into your critical thinking abilities, your approach to problem-solving, and your interpersonal skills when it comes to correcting a colleague without causing offense or discord.

When responding, it’s important to highlight your attention to detail and commitment to accuracy while demonstrating empathy and respect for your colleague’s perspective. Begin by describing the situation and the significance of the logical fallacy that was identified. Explain the steps you took to address the issue, focusing on your communication style and how you helped guide the team member towards a more logical conclusion. Emphasize the outcome, ideally showcasing a positive resolution that led to a more effective team decision-making process.

Example: “ In a recent strategic planning session, a team member argued that because our most successful product had always been the market leader, we should continue the same marketing strategy without considering recent shifts in consumer behavior. This was a clear example of the appeal to tradition fallacy, where the assumption is that something is better or correct simply because it is older or traditional.

I addressed this by first acknowledging the past success of our marketing strategies to validate their perspective. Then, I gently introduced current market research data that indicated changing consumer preferences, which suggested that our traditional approach might not yield the same results moving forward. By focusing on empirical evidence and framing it as an opportunity for innovation rather than a critique of past methods, I encouraged a collaborative reassessment of our strategy. This approach facilitated a productive dialogue that ultimately led to the adaptation of our marketing plan, aligning it with contemporary trends and resulting in sustained market leadership.”

9. When confronted with multiple solutions, how do you determine the most effective path forward?

Analyzing various solutions to a problem and selecting the one that maximizes efficiency and outcomes is a key aspect of effective decision-making. This question delves into your problem-solving methodology and your ability to prioritize, weigh trade-offs, and foresee potential outcomes.

When responding, outline your decision-making process clearly. Begin by explaining how you gather and assess information, mentioning any analytical tools or frameworks you use, such as SWOT analysis or decision trees. Discuss how you consider the impact on stakeholders, resources, and timelines. Provide examples from your experience where you have successfully navigated complex decisions, highlighting the outcomes and what you learned from the process. Show that you are methodical and can remain objective, yet flexible when circumstances change.

Example: “ When confronted with multiple solutions, my approach is to first establish a clear understanding of the problem and the desired outcomes. I employ a combination of analytical tools such as decision trees, which help visualize the paths and potential consequences, and a SWOT analysis to evaluate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with each option. This structured analysis allows for a comprehensive comparison of the solutions based on quantifiable data and strategic fit.

I then weigh the potential impact on stakeholders, considering both short-term and long-term implications, while also assessing resource allocation and adherence to project timelines. In a recent complex project, I utilized this method to identify a solution that, while not the most immediate in terms of short-term gains, offered substantial long-term benefits with manageable risks. This decision resulted in a more sustainable and scalable outcome, reinforcing the importance of a balanced and forward-looking approach. My decision-making process is rooted in objectivity, but I remain adaptable, ready to pivot strategies in response to evolving situations or new information.”

10. Illustrate how you handle situations where logic and emotion are at odds in decision-making.

In moments where rational thought clashes with emotional response, a delicate balance is required. Such situations demand decisions made with clarity and without bias, yet with an understanding of the human element involved. It highlights your emotional intelligence, critical thinking skills, and your approach to problem-solving in complex scenarios.

To respond effectively, candidates should recount a specific instance where they faced such a conflict. They should describe the situation, the logical and emotional components involved, and the steps they took to reach a resolution. It’s crucial to articulate the thought process behind the final decision, showcasing the ability to weigh both logical outcomes and emotional impacts. The response should demonstrate the candidate’s capacity for thoughtful reflection and the integration of both analytical and empathetic perspectives.

Example: “ In one instance, I was confronted with a decision that had significant emotional weight due to its potential impact on a team member’s well-being, yet logically, the alternative option promised a more favorable outcome for the project’s success. The logical path suggested reallocating resources from an area that was underperforming, but this meant reassigning a dedicated team member who had invested considerable effort, albeit with limited success.

To navigate this conflict, I first acknowledged the emotional investment and the potential for morale implications. I then conducted a thorough analysis of the situation, examining data to assess the potential gains against the emotional cost. After careful consideration, I initiated a transparent dialogue with the involved parties, explaining the logical reasoning and the necessity for change while also expressing empathy for the emotional aspects. The resolution came through a collaborative approach, where we found a compromise that maintained the project’s integrity and addressed the team member’s concerns, ultimately reinforcing trust and respect within the team. This experience underscored the importance of balancing logical decision-making with emotional intelligence, ensuring that outcomes are both effective and considerate of the people involved.”

11. Outline a method you use to prioritize tasks when all appear equally important.

Prioritization methods are crucial for efficiently allocating time and resources, even under pressure. By asking about these methods, the focus is on your ability to analyze tasks, weigh their potential impacts, and make strategic decisions.

When responding to this question, describe a specific prioritization framework or strategy you use, such as the Eisenhower Matrix, which separates tasks into categories based on urgency and importance. Explain how you assess each task’s value, deadline, and resources required. Offer an example of a time when you successfully prioritized tasks, emphasizing your flexibility and ability to maintain productivity without sacrificing quality. Make it clear that your approach is both systematic and adaptable, ensuring that you remain focused on achieving key objectives while being prepared to re-evaluate priorities as situations evolve.

Example: “ To prioritize tasks that initially seem equally important, I employ the Eisenhower Matrix, which helps me distinguish between urgency and importance. I begin by assessing the value each task adds to the overarching goals, considering factors such as potential impact and alignment with strategic objectives. Deadlines are then factored in to identify which tasks are time-sensitive, and I evaluate the resources required to ensure that the necessary support is available for execution.

Recently, I was faced with a cluster of critical tasks that demanded immediate attention. I applied the matrix and identified two tasks that were both urgent and important, directly affecting key project milestones. I prioritized these for immediate action. The remaining tasks, while important, were less time-sensitive, allowing me to schedule them appropriately without compromising the quality of work. This systematic yet flexible approach ensures that I maintain productivity and adapt to evolving priorities, consistently delivering results that align with core objectives.”

12. Recall a complex project where you had to apply sequential logic; what was your strategy?

Applying sequential logic to complex projects allows for a structured and methodical approach, ensuring that each step builds upon the previous one. This question determines your ability to break down complex tasks into manageable units and foresee potential challenges.

To respond, outline a specific project where you had to employ sequential logic. Detail the steps you took to analyze the situation, how you identified the necessary sequence of actions, and the tools or methodologies you used to keep the project on track. Highlight your ability to think critically, anticipate obstacles, and adapt your strategy when necessary. Providing concrete examples of how your logical approach directly contributed to the project’s success will demonstrate your proficiency in this area.

Example: “ In a complex project involving the integration of a new software system with existing legacy systems, I applied sequential logic to ensure a smooth transition and minimal downtime. My strategy began with a thorough analysis of the dependencies and interactions between the systems. I identified the critical paths and created a detailed flowchart that outlined the sequence of steps required for integration, including data migration, system testing, and user training.

To keep the project on track, I utilized a combination of project management tools and logical frameworks, such as decision trees to anticipate potential issues and Gantt charts to visualize the timeline. I iteratively reviewed and adjusted the sequence as the project progressed, which allowed for flexibility in response to unforeseen challenges. This logical approach not only facilitated a successful integration but also ensured that all stakeholders were informed and prepared for each phase of the project.”

13. How do you assess the validity of information sources when conducting research?

Discerning reliable information from the unreliable is particularly important when conducting research that informs critical decisions or projects. This question delves into your critical thinking skills, your approach to research methodology, and your capacity to recognize bias and authority in the information you utilize.

When responding, a candidate should outline a systematic approach to evaluating sources, perhaps referencing established criteria such as the author’s expertise, the publication’s reputation, the date of the information, and the presence of citations or supporting evidence. It’s beneficial to mention cross-referencing data with multiple sources and using peer-reviewed materials when possible. Demonstrating a thoughtful and methodical process reassures the interviewer of the candidate’s meticulous nature and commitment to accuracy in their work.

Example: “ When assessing the validity of information sources, I employ a critical evaluation framework that scrutinizes the author’s credentials and expertise in the subject matter, ensuring they are recognized authorities in the field. I then examine the publication’s reputation, prioritizing sources from reputable, peer-reviewed journals or established academic publishers. The currency of the information is also a key factor; I look for the most recent data to ensure relevancy, but also consider the historical context when necessary.

Furthermore, I meticulously check for citations and supporting evidence within the material, as this indicates a rigorous academic standard and enhances credibility. Cross-referencing findings with multiple sources is a crucial step in my process, as it allows me to verify the consistency and reliability of the information. This systematic approach ensures that the research I conduct is grounded in accurate and authoritative data, which is essential for logical and informed decision-making.”

14. Provide an example of how you’ve broken down a ‘wicked problem’ into manageable parts.

Tackling ‘wicked problems’ requires dissecting them into smaller, more manageable components. This not only demonstrates your logical thinking but also your capacity to tackle projects systematically and effectively.

When responding to this question, it’s essential to choose a relevant example that showcases your analytical skills. Describe the problem in clear terms, then detail the steps you took to break it down. Explain how you identified the key components of the issue, prioritized them, and devised a plan to address each part. Highlight any tools or methodologies you used in the process, such as flowcharts, mind maps, or the “divide and conquer” technique. Conclude with the outcome, reflecting on what you learned and how it has shaped your approach to problem-solving in your career.

Example: “ null”

15. What techniques do you utilize to forecast potential outcomes of decisions you make?

Anticipating the consequences of decisions affects the success of projects, strategies, and overall business operations. The ability to forecast outcomes demonstrates an understanding of cause and effect, a grasp of strategic planning, and a readiness to take responsibility for decisions made.

To respond effectively to this question, outline your process for evaluating potential decisions. Start by mentioning any tools or frameworks you use—such as SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) or decision trees. Discuss how you gather and analyze relevant data to understand possible future trends. Explain how you involve stakeholders to gain different perspectives and how you consider both short-term and long-term implications of your choices. Finally, share an example of a past decision you made using these techniques and the outcome that followed.

Example: “ In forecasting potential outcomes of decisions, I employ a combination of decision trees and scenario analysis to map out the possible consequences of each choice. Decision trees help in structuring the problem and quantifying the probabilities and potential impacts of different outcomes. Scenario analysis complements this by allowing me to explore various ‘what if’ situations, considering both optimistic and pessimistic projections to ensure a comprehensive understanding of risks and opportunities.

I also prioritize the collection and analysis of high-quality data, which informs the probabilities and outcomes within my decision models. This is coupled with engaging stakeholders to provide insights that might not be evident from quantitative data alone, ensuring a holistic view of the decision landscape. For instance, in a recent situation where multiple pathways were possible, I utilized these techniques to identify the most resilient strategy under various market conditions. This approach resulted in a decision that not only mitigated potential risks but also capitalized on an unforeseen opportunity, leading to a favorable outcome that aligned with our strategic objectives.”

16. How have you dealt with scenarios where insufficient data was available to make a logical conclusion?

In scenarios with insufficient data, assessing the quality of available information and determining the best course of action under uncertainty is crucial. This question determines how you approach problem-solving when perfect information isn’t available.

When responding, outline a structured approach: first, explain how you evaluate the existing data for relevance and reliability. Then, describe how you seek additional information, perhaps by consulting with knowledgeable individuals, using analogous experiences, or relying on industry best practices. If no further data can be obtained, discuss how you weigh the potential risks and benefits of the decisions at hand. Finally, share a specific example where you successfully navigated such a situation, emphasizing your thought process and the positive outcome that resulted.

Example: “ In situations where data is insufficient, my approach is to first critically assess the available information for its validity and applicability to the problem at hand. I then identify gaps and formulate hypotheses based on the current data set. To fill these gaps, I explore alternative sources of information, such as expert opinions, historical data, or parallel industry benchmarks, which can provide indirect insights or proxy variables that help in constructing a more informed picture.

For instance, when faced with a decision that lacked direct historical data, I leveraged a combination of expert judgment and principles from similar scenarios to estimate potential outcomes. This method involved a thorough risk assessment, where I quantified the uncertainties and developed a range of plausible scenarios. By preparing for multiple eventualities and establishing contingency plans, I was able to proceed with a decision that balanced risk with the potential for reward. The outcome was favorable and demonstrated the effectiveness of a structured, logical approach in the face of incomplete data.”

17. Give an account of a time when you had to adapt your thinking due to changing circumstances.

Adaptability in the face of new information or unexpected situations is a valuable trait in dynamic and fast-paced work environments. This question digs into your ability to evolve your thinking and approaches when required.

When responding to this question, highlight a scenario where your initial approach to a problem or project had to be altered due to new insights, unexpected challenges, or feedback. Outline the original plan, the changes that occurred, and how you adapted your thinking. Be sure to emphasize your reasoning process throughout the adaptation, the outcome of the situation, and what you learned from the experience. This will showcase your logical thinking abilities, adaptability, and openness to learning and growth.

Example: “ During a project that involved data analysis for optimizing supply chain operations, I initially approached the problem with a traditional regression analysis to predict stock levels. However, as the project progressed, it became apparent that the data was affected by seasonal trends and external economic factors that the initial model did not account for.

Adapting to this new understanding, I shifted my approach to incorporate a mixed-model that included time-series analysis, allowing for the prediction of stock levels with greater accuracy by accounting for these additional variables. This logical pivot was driven by the principle that models must reflect the complexity of real-world phenomena to be effective. The outcome was a more robust predictive system that led to a 15% reduction in overstock situations and a 10% improvement in inventory turnover. This experience reinforced the importance of remaining flexible and responsive to data patterns and the external environment when applying logical thinking to complex problems.”

18. Describe your thought process when analyzing the risk vs. reward in significant initiatives.

Analyzing risk versus reward is especially crucial when embarking on significant initiatives where the stakes are high. This question delves into your capability to evaluate various outcomes, consider probabilities, and use both qualitative and quantitative data to make informed choices.

When responding, outline a structured approach: start by defining the initiative’s objectives, list potential risks and rewards, and describe how you’d measure these against each other. Explain how you gather relevant data, seek expert opinions, and possibly use decision-making frameworks or tools to guide your process. It’s beneficial to illustrate your answer with a concrete example from your past experience, highlighting how your analysis influenced the final decision and what the outcome was. Show that you can be both cautious and bold, depending on what the situation demands.

Example: “ In analyzing risk versus reward, I first clarify the initiative’s objectives to ensure alignment with strategic goals. I then systematically identify potential risks and rewards, categorizing them by probability and impact. This involves a thorough review of quantitative data, such as financial projections and market analysis, as well as qualitative insights, like potential brand implications or stakeholder reactions.

To measure these factors against each other, I employ decision-making frameworks like cost-benefit analysis or decision trees, which allow for a structured comparison of the potential outcomes. I also seek expert opinions to challenge my assumptions and fill any knowledge gaps. For instance, in a previous initiative, this approach revealed that the perceived high risk of entering a new market was mitigated by the long-term strategic benefit and the potential for significant market share. The decision to proceed, albeit with a carefully phased approach, resulted in a successful expansion and a substantial return on investment. This process demonstrates my ability to balance caution with boldness, applying logical thinking to drive informed, strategic decisions.”

19. What steps do you take to ensure unbiased reasoning when evaluating different viewpoints?

Demonstrating an awareness of your own potential biases and actively working to mitigate them ensures that decisions are based on facts and a balanced understanding of all perspectives. The ability to evaluate viewpoints objectively is crucial for roles that involve problem-solving, strategy development, and innovation.

When responding to this question, it’s important to outline a clear, structured approach. You might begin by explaining how you actively seek out differing perspectives to broaden your understanding of an issue. Discuss how you prioritize evidence over opinion, perhaps illustrating with an example of a time when data led you to a conclusion that differed from your initial assumption. Mention techniques you use to challenge your own viewpoints, such as playing devil’s advocate or seeking peer review. Emphasize the importance of continuous learning and self-reflection in honing your ability to reason without bias, showing that you’re committed to personal growth and professional excellence.

Example: “ To ensure unbiased reasoning, I first gather information from a diverse range of sources, actively seeking perspectives that challenge my preconceptions. I then apply critical thinking to evaluate the credibility of each source, prioritizing empirical evidence and data over anecdotal or opinion-based information. For instance, when faced with a complex problem, I encountered conflicting viewpoints, and through a rigorous analysis of the available data, I adopted a stance that was initially counterintuitive to my own but supported by the evidence.

I also employ techniques such as the devil’s advocate approach to test the strength of my conclusions, and I seek peer review to expose any potential blind spots. This practice not only fortifies my arguments but also ensures a multi-faceted examination of the issue at hand. Continuous learning is a cornerstone of my approach; I regularly engage in self-reflection and seek feedback to refine my reasoning skills, recognizing that the process of minimizing bias is ongoing and requires a commitment to intellectual honesty and adaptability.”

20. How do you maintain clarity and focus when dealing with abstract concepts or problems?

Navigating abstract problems effectively requires a clear and structured approach. Employers are keen on understanding whether you can dissect complex, intangible issues without getting overwhelmed or losing sight of the objective.

When responding, outline a systematic approach you use to tackle abstract problems. You might describe breaking down the problem into smaller, more manageable parts, using visual aids like diagrams or flowcharts, or applying theoretical frameworks. Illustrate your answer with a specific example from your past experience where you successfully maintained clarity and focus to solve an abstract problem. Be sure to highlight the steps you took, the outcome, and what you learned from the experience.

Example: “ To maintain clarity and focus when dealing with abstract concepts, I employ a structured approach that begins with defining the problem in clear terms. I break down the concept into its fundamental components, which allows me to analyze the relationships and interactions between these elements. This process often involves creating visual aids such as diagrams or flowcharts to map out the problem space and identify patterns or inconsistencies that may not be immediately apparent.

For instance, when faced with a complex problem involving predictive analytics, I distilled the abstract concept into a series of statistical models, each representing a different aspect of the data. By isolating the variables and examining their correlations, I was able to construct a cohesive framework that provided actionable insights. The outcome was a robust predictive model that significantly improved decision-making processes. This experience reinforced the value of a methodical approach to abstract problems, underscoring the importance of simplicity and structure in achieving clarity and focus.”

Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking

(10 reviews)

Matthew Van Cleave, Lansing Community College

Publisher: Matthew J. Van Cleave

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by "yusef" Alexander Hayes, Professor, North Shore Community College on 6/9/21

Formal and informal reasoning, argument structure, and fallacies are covered comprehensively, meeting the author's goal of both depth and succinctness. read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

Formal and informal reasoning, argument structure, and fallacies are covered comprehensively, meeting the author's goal of both depth and succinctness.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

The book is accurate.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

While many modern examples are used, and they are helpful, they are not necessarily needed. The usefulness of logical principles and skills have proved themselves, and this text presents them clearly with many examples.

Clarity rating: 5

It is obvious that the author cares about their subject, audience, and students. The text is comprehensible and interesting.

Consistency rating: 5

The format is easy to understand and is consistent in framing.

Modularity rating: 5

This text would be easy to adapt.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

The organization is excellent, my one suggestion would be a concluding chapter.

Interface rating: 5

I accessed the PDF version and it would be easy to work with.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

The writing is excellent.

Cultural Relevance rating: 5

This is not an offensive text.

Reviewed by Susan Rottmann, Part-time Lecturer, University of Southern Maine on 3/2/21

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

I reviewed this book for a course titled "Creative and Critical Inquiry into Modern Life." It won't meet all my needs for that course, but I haven't yet found a book that would. I wanted to review this one because it states in the preface that it fits better for a general critical thinking course than for a true logic course. I'm not sure that I'd agree. I have been using Browne and Keeley's "Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking," and I think that book is a better introduction to critical thinking for non-philosophy majors. However, the latter is not open source so I will figure out how to get by without it in the future. Overall, the book seems comprehensive if the subject is logic. The index is on the short-side, but fine. However, one issue for me is that there are no page numbers on the table of contents, which is pretty annoying if you want to locate particular sections.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

I didn't find any errors. In general the book uses great examples. However, they are very much based in the American context, not for an international student audience. Some effort to broaden the chosen examples would make the book more widely applicable.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

I think the book will remain relevant because of the nature of the material that it addresses, however there will be a need to modify the examples in future editions and as the social and political context changes.

Clarity rating: 3

The text is lucid, but I think it would be difficult for introductory-level students who are not philosophy majors. For example, in Browne and Keeley's "Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking," the sub-headings are very accessible, such as "Experts cannot rescue us, despite what they say" or "wishful thinking: perhaps the biggest single speed bump on the road to critical thinking." By contrast, Van Cleave's "Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking" has more subheadings like this: "Using your own paraphrases of premises and conclusions to reconstruct arguments in standard form" or "Propositional logic and the four basic truth functional connectives." If students are prepared very well for the subject, it would work fine, but for students who are newly being introduced to critical thinking, it is rather technical.

It seems to be very consistent in terms of its terminology and framework.

Modularity rating: 4

The book is divided into 4 chapters, each having many sub-chapters. In that sense, it is readily divisible and modular. However, as noted above, there are no page numbers on the table of contents, which would make assigning certain parts rather frustrating. Also, I'm not sure why the book is only four chapter and has so many subheadings (for instance 17 in Chapter 2) and a length of 242 pages. Wouldn't it make more sense to break up the book into shorter chapters? I think this would make it easier to read and to assign in specific blocks to students.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

The organization of the book is fine overall, although I think adding page numbers to the table of contents and breaking it up into more separate chapters would help it to be more easily navigable.

Interface rating: 4

The book is very simply presented. In my opinion it is actually too simple. There are few boxes or diagrams that highlight and explain important points.

The text seems fine grammatically. I didn't notice any errors.

The book is written with an American audience in mind, but I did not notice culturally insensitive or offensive parts.

Overall, this book is not for my course, but I think it could work well in a philosophy course.

Reviewed by Daniel Lee, Assistant Professor of Economics and Leadership, Sweet Briar College on 11/11/19

This textbook is not particularly comprehensive (4 chapters long), but I view that as a benefit. In fact, I recommend it for use outside of traditional logic classes, but rather interdisciplinary classes that evaluate argument read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 3 see less

To the best of my ability, I regard this content as accurate, error-free, and unbiased

The book is broadly relevant and up-to-date, with a few stray temporal references (sydney olympics, particular presidencies). I don't view these time-dated examples as problematic as the logical underpinnings are still there and easily assessed

Clarity rating: 4

My only pushback on clarity is I didn't find the distinction between argument and explanation particularly helpful/useful/easy to follow. However, this experience may have been unique to my class.

To the best of my ability, I regard this content as internally consistent

I found this text quite modular, and was easily able to integrate other texts into my lessons and disregard certain chapters or sub-sections

The book had a logical and consistent structure, but to the extent that there are only 4 chapters, there isn't much scope for alternative approaches here

No problems with the book's interface

The text is grammatically sound

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

Perhaps the text could have been more universal in its approach. While I didn't find the book insensitive per-se, logic can be tricky here because the point is to evaluate meaningful (non-trivial) arguments, but any argument with that sense of gravity can also be traumatic to students (abortion, death penalty, etc)

No additional comments

Reviewed by Lisa N. Thomas-Smith, Graduate Part-time Instructor, CU Boulder on 7/1/19

The text covers all the relevant technical aspects of introductory logic and critical thinking, and covers them well. A separate glossary would be quite helpful to students. However, the terms are clearly and thoroughly explained within the text,... read more

The content is excellent. The text is thorough and accurate with no errors that I could discern. The terminology and exercises cover the material nicely and without bias.

The text should easily stand the test of time. The exercises are excellent and would be very helpful for students to internalize correct critical thinking practices. Because of the logical arrangement of the text and the many sub-sections, additional material should be very easy to add.

The text is extremely clearly and simply written. I anticipate that a diligent student could learn all of the material in the text with little additional instruction. The examples are relevant and easy to follow.

The text did not confuse terms or use inconsistent terminology, which is very important in a logic text. The discipline often uses multiple terms for the same concept, but this text avoids that trap nicely.

The text is fairly easily divisible. Since there are only four chapters, those chapters include large blocks of information. However, the chapters themselves are very well delineated and could be easily broken up so that parts could be left out or covered in a different order from the text.

The flow of the text is excellent. All of the information is handled solidly in an order that allows the student to build on the information previously covered.

The PDF Table of Contents does not include links or page numbers which would be very helpful for navigation. Other than that, the text was very easy to navigate. All the images, charts, and graphs were very clear

I found no grammatical errors in the text.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

The text including examples and exercises did not seem to be offensive or insensitive in any specific way. However, the examples included references to black and white people, but few others. Also, the text is very American specific with many examples from and for an American audience. More diversity, especially in the examples, would be appropriate and appreciated.

Reviewed by Leslie Aarons, Associate Professor of Philosophy, CUNY LaGuardia Community College on 5/16/19

This is an excellent introductory (first-year) Logic and Critical Thinking textbook. The book covers the important elementary information, clearly discussing such things as the purpose and basic structure of an argument; the difference between an argument and an explanation; validity; soundness; and the distinctions between an inductive and a deductive argument in accessible terms in the first chapter. It also does a good job introducing and discussing informal fallacies (Chapter 4). The incorporation of opportunities to evaluate real-world arguments is also very effective. Chapter 2 also covers a number of formal methods of evaluating arguments, such as Venn Diagrams and Propositional logic and the four basic truth functional connectives, but to my mind, it is much more thorough in its treatment of Informal Logic and Critical Thinking skills, than it is of formal logic. I also appreciated that Van Cleave’s book includes exercises with answers and an index, but there is no glossary; which I personally do not find detracts from the book's comprehensiveness.

Overall, Van Cleave's book is error-free and unbiased. The language used is accessible and engaging. There were no glaring inaccuracies that I was able to detect.

Van Cleave's Textbook uses relevant, contemporary content that will stand the test of time, at least for the next few years. Although some examples use certain subjects like former President Obama, it does so in a useful manner that inspires the use of critical thinking skills. There are an abundance of examples that inspire students to look at issues from many different political viewpoints, challenging students to practice evaluating arguments, and identifying fallacies. Many of these exercises encourage students to critique issues, and recognize their own inherent reader-biases and challenge their own beliefs--hallmarks of critical thinking.

As mentioned previously, the author has an accessible style that makes the content relatively easy to read and engaging. He also does a suitable job explaining jargon/technical language that is introduced in the textbook.

Van Cleave uses terminology consistently and the chapters flow well. The textbook orients the reader by offering effective introductions to new material, step-by-step explanations of the material, as well as offering clear summaries of each lesson.

This textbook's modularity is really quite good. Its language and structure are not overly convoluted or too-lengthy, making it convenient for individual instructors to adapt the materials to suit their methodological preferences.

The topics in the textbook are presented in a logical and clear fashion. The structure of the chapters are such that it is not necessary to have to follow the chapters in their sequential order, and coverage of material can be adapted to individual instructor's preferences.

The textbook is free of any problematic interface issues. Topics, sections and specific content are accessible and easy to navigate. Overall it is user-friendly.

I did not find any significant grammatical issues with the textbook.

The textbook is not culturally insensitive, making use of a diversity of inclusive examples. Materials are especially effective for first-year critical thinking/logic students.

I intend to adopt Van Cleave's textbook for a Critical Thinking class I am teaching at the Community College level. I believe that it will help me facilitate student-learning, and will be a good resource to build additional classroom activities from the materials it provides.

Reviewed by Jennie Harrop, Chair, Department of Professional Studies, George Fox University on 3/27/18

While the book is admirably comprehensive, its extensive details within a few short chapters may feel overwhelming to students. The author tackles an impressive breadth of concepts in Chapter 1, 2, 3, and 4, which leads to 50-plus-page chapters that are dense with statistical analyses and critical vocabulary. These topics are likely better broached in manageable snippets rather than hefty single chapters.

The ideas addressed in Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking are accurate but at times notably political. While politics are effectively used to exemplify key concepts, some students may be distracted by distinct political leanings.

The terms and definitions included are relevant, but the examples are specific to the current political, cultural, and social climates, which could make the materials seem dated in a few years without intentional and consistent updates.

While the reasoning is accurate, the author tends to complicate rather than simplify -- perhaps in an effort to cover a spectrum of related concepts. Beginning readers are likely to be overwhelmed and under-encouraged by his approach.

Consistency rating: 3

The four chapters are somewhat consistent in their play of definition, explanation, and example, but the structure of each chapter varies according to the concepts covered. In the third chapter, for example, key ideas are divided into sub-topics numbering from 3.1 to 3.10. In the fourth chapter, the sub-divisions are further divided into sub-sections numbered 4.1.1-4.1.5, 4.2.1-4.2.2, and 4.3.1 to 4.3.6. Readers who are working quickly to master new concepts may find themselves mired in similarly numbered subheadings, longing for a grounded concepts on which to hinge other key principles.

Modularity rating: 3

The book's four chapters make it mostly self-referential. The author would do well to beak this text down into additional subsections, easing readers' accessibility.

The content of the book flows logically and well, but the information needs to be better sub-divided within each larger chapter, easing the student experience.

The book's interface is effective, allowing readers to move from one section to the next with a single click. Additional sub-sections would ease this interplay even further.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

Some minor errors throughout.

For the most part, the book is culturally neutral, avoiding direct cultural references in an effort to remain relevant.

Reviewed by Yoichi Ishida, Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Ohio University on 2/1/18

This textbook covers enough topics for a first-year course on logic and critical thinking. Chapter 1 covers the basics as in any standard textbook in this area. Chapter 2 covers propositional logic and categorical logic. In propositional logic, this textbook does not cover suppositional arguments, such as conditional proof and reductio ad absurdum. But other standard argument forms are covered. Chapter 3 covers inductive logic, and here this textbook introduces probability and its relationship with cognitive biases, which are rarely discussed in other textbooks. Chapter 4 introduces common informal fallacies. The answers to all the exercises are given at the end. However, the last set of exercises is in Chapter 3, Section 5. There are no exercises in the rest of the chapter. Chapter 4 has no exercises either. There is index, but no glossary.

The textbook is accurate.

The content of this textbook will not become obsolete soon.

The textbook is written clearly.

The textbook is internally consistent.

The textbook is fairly modular. For example, Chapter 3, together with a few sections from Chapter 1, can be used as a short introduction to inductive logic.

The textbook is well-organized.

There are no interface issues.

I did not find any grammatical errors.

This textbook is relevant to a first semester logic or critical thinking course.

Reviewed by Payal Doctor, Associate Professro, LaGuardia Community College on 2/1/18

This text is a beginner textbook for arguments and propositional logic. It covers the basics of identifying arguments, building arguments, and using basic logic to construct propositions and arguments. It is quite comprehensive for a beginner book, but seems to be a good text for a course that needs a foundation for arguments. There are exercises on creating truth tables and proofs, so it could work as a logic primer in short sessions or with the addition of other course content.

The books is accurate in the information it presents. It does not contain errors and is unbiased. It covers the essential vocabulary clearly and givens ample examples and exercises to ensure the student understands the concepts

The content of the book is up to date and can be easily updated. Some examples are very current for analyzing the argument structure in a speech, but for this sort of text understandable examples are important and the author uses good examples.

The book is clear and easy to read. In particular, this is a good text for community college students who often have difficulty with reading comprehension. The language is straightforward and concepts are well explained.

The book is consistent in terminology, formatting, and examples. It flows well from one topic to the next, but it is also possible to jump around the text without loosing the voice of the text.

The books is broken down into sub units that make it easy to assign short blocks of content at a time. Later in the text, it does refer to a few concepts that appear early in that text, but these are all basic concepts that must be used to create a clear and understandable text. No sections are too long and each section stays on topic and relates the topic to those that have come before when necessary.

The flow of the text is logical and clear. It begins with the basic building blocks of arguments, and practice identifying more and more complex arguments is offered. Each chapter builds up from the previous chapter in introducing propositional logic, truth tables, and logical arguments. A select number of fallacies are presented at the end of the text, but these are related to topics that were presented before, so it makes sense to have these last.

The text is free if interface issues. I used the PDF and it worked fine on various devices without loosing formatting.

1. The book contains no grammatical errors.

The text is culturally sensitive, but examples used are a bit odd and may be objectionable to some students. For instance, President Obama's speech on Syria is used to evaluate an extended argument. This is an excellent example and it is explained well, but some who disagree with Obama's policies may have trouble moving beyond their own politics. However, other examples look at issues from all political viewpoints and ask students to evaluate the argument, fallacy, etc. and work towards looking past their own beliefs. Overall this book does use a variety of examples that most students can understand and evaluate.

My favorite part of this book is that it seems to be written for community college students. My students have trouble understanding readings in the New York Times, so it is nice to see a logic and critical thinking text use real language that students can understand and follow without the constant need of a dictionary.

Reviewed by Rebecca Owen, Adjunct Professor, Writing, Chemeketa Community College on 6/20/17

This textbook is quite thorough--there are conversational explanations of argument structure and logic. I think students will be happy with the conversational style this author employs. Also, there are many examples and exercises using current events, funny scenarios, or other interesting ways to evaluate argument structure and validity. The third section, which deals with logical fallacies, is very clear and comprehensive. My only critique of the material included in the book is that the middle section may be a bit dense and math-oriented for learners who appreciate the more informal, informative style of the first and third section. Also, the book ends rather abruptly--it moves from a description of a logical fallacy to the answers for the exercises earlier in the text.

The content is very reader-friendly, and the author writes with authority and clarity throughout the text. There are a few surface-level typos (Starbuck's instead of Starbucks, etc.). None of these small errors detract from the quality of the content, though.

One thing I really liked about this text was the author's wide variety of examples. To demonstrate different facets of logic, he used examples from current media, movies, literature, and many other concepts that students would recognize from their daily lives. The exercises in this text also included these types of pop-culture references, and I think students will enjoy the familiarity--as well as being able to see the logical structures behind these types of references. I don't think the text will need to be updated to reflect new instances and occurrences; the author did a fine job at picking examples that are relatively timeless. As far as the subject matter itself, I don't think it will become obsolete any time soon.

The author writes in a very conversational, easy-to-read manner. The examples used are quite helpful. The third section on logical fallacies is quite easy to read, follow, and understand. A student in an argument writing class could benefit from this section of the book. The middle section is less clear, though. A student learning about the basics of logic might have a hard time digesting all of the information contained in chapter two. This material might be better in two separate chapters. I think the author loses the balance of a conversational, helpful tone and focuses too heavily on equations.

Consistency rating: 4

Terminology in this book is quite consistent--the key words are highlighted in bold. Chapters 1 and 3 follow a similar organizational pattern, but chapter 2 is where the material becomes more dense and equation-heavy. I also would have liked a closing passage--something to indicate to the reader that we've reached the end of the chapter as well as the book.

I liked the overall structure of this book. If I'm teaching an argumentative writing class, I could easily point the students to the chapters where they can identify and practice identifying fallacies, for instance. The opening chapter is clear in defining the necessary terms, and it gives the students an understanding of the toolbox available to them in assessing and evaluating arguments. Even though I found the middle section to be dense, smaller portions could be assigned.

The author does a fine job connecting each defined term to the next. He provides examples of how each defined term works in a sentence or in an argument, and then he provides practice activities for students to try. The answers for each question are listed in the final pages of the book. The middle section feels like the heaviest part of the whole book--it would take the longest time for a student to digest if assigned the whole chapter. Even though this middle section is a bit heavy, it does fit the overall structure and flow of the book. New material builds on previous chapters and sub-chapters. It ends abruptly--I didn't realize that it had ended, and all of a sudden I found myself in the answer section for those earlier exercises.

The simple layout is quite helpful! There is nothing distracting, image-wise, in this text. The table of contents is clearly arranged, and each topic is easy to find.

Tiny edits could be made (Starbuck's/Starbucks, for one). Otherwise, it is free of distracting grammatical errors.

This text is quite culturally relevant. For instance, there is one example that mentions the rumors of Barack Obama's birthplace as somewhere other than the United States. This example is used to explain how to analyze an argument for validity. The more "sensational" examples (like the Obama one above) are helpful in showing argument structure, and they can also help students see how rumors like this might gain traction--as well as help to show students how to debunk them with their newfound understanding of argument and logic.

The writing style is excellent for the subject matter, especially in the third section explaining logical fallacies. Thank you for the opportunity to read and review this text!

Reviewed by Laurel Panser, Instructor, Riverland Community College on 6/20/17

This is a review of Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, an open source book version 1.4 by Matthew Van Cleave. The comparison book used was Patrick J. Hurley’s A Concise Introduction to Logic 12th Edition published by Cengage as well as... read more

Competing with Hurley is difficult with respect to comprehensiveness. For example, Van Cleave’s book is comprehensive to the extent that it probably covers at least two-thirds or more of what is dealt with in most introductory, one-semester logic courses. Van Cleave’s chapter 1 provides an overview of argumentation including discerning non-arguments from arguments, premises versus conclusions, deductive from inductive arguments, validity, soundness and more. Much of Van Cleave’s chapter 1 parallel’s Hurley’s chapter 1. Hurley’s chapter 3 regarding informal fallacies is comprehensive while Van Cleave’s chapter 4 on this topic is less extensive. Categorical propositions are a topic in Van Cleave’s chapter 2; Hurley’s chapters 4 and 5 provide more instruction on this, however. Propositional logic is another topic in Van Cleave’s chapter 2; Hurley’s chapters 6 and 7 provide more information on this, though. Van Cleave did discuss messy issues of language meaning briefly in his chapter 1; that is the topic of Hurley’s chapter 2.

Van Cleave’s book includes exercises with answers and an index. A glossary was not included.

Reviews of open source textbooks typically include criteria besides comprehensiveness. These include comments on accuracy of the information, whether the book will become obsolete soon, jargon-free clarity to the extent that is possible, organization, navigation ease, freedom from grammar errors and cultural relevance; Van Cleave’s book is fine in all of these areas. Further criteria for open source books includes modularity and consistency of terminology. Modularity is defined as including blocks of learning material that are easy to assign to students. Hurley’s book has a greater degree of modularity than Van Cleave’s textbook. The prose Van Cleave used is consistent.

Van Cleave’s book will not become obsolete soon.

Van Cleave’s book has accessible prose.

Van Cleave used terminology consistently.

Van Cleave’s book has a reasonable degree of modularity.

Van Cleave’s book is organized. The structure and flow of his book is fine.

Problems with navigation are not present.

Grammar problems were not present.

Van Cleave’s book is culturally relevant.

Van Cleave’s book is appropriate for some first semester logic courses.

Chapter 1: Reconstructing and analyzing arguments

1.1 What is an argument?
1.2 Identifying arguments
1.3 Arguments vs. explanations
1.4 More complex argument structures
1.5 Using your own paraphrases of premises and conclusions to reconstruct arguments in standard form
1.6 Validity
1.7 Soundness
1.8 Deductive vs. inductive arguments
1.9 Arguments with missing premises
1.10 Assuring, guarding, and discounting
1.11 Evaluative language
1.12 Evaluating a real-life argument

Chapter 2: Formal methods of evaluating arguments

2.1 What is a formal method of evaluation and why do we need them?
2.2 Propositional logic and the four basic truth functional connectives
2.3 Negation and disjunction
2.4 Using parentheses to translate complex sentences
2.5 “Not both” and “neither nor”
2.6 The truth table test of validity
2.7 Conditionals
2.8 “Unless”
2.9 Material equivalence
2.10 Tautologies, contradictions, and contingent statements
2.11 Proofs and the 8 valid forms of inference
2.12 How to construct proofs
2.13 Short review of propositional logic
2.14 Categorical logic
2.15 The Venn test of validity for immediate categorical inferences
2.16 Universal statements and existential commitment
2.17 Venn validity for categorical syllogisms

Chapter 3: Evaluating inductive arguments and probabilistic and statistical fallacies

3.1 Inductive arguments and statistical generalizations
3.2 Inference to the best explanation and the seven explanatory virtues
3.3 Analogical arguments
3.4 Causal arguments
3.5 Probability
3.6 The conjunction fallacy
3.7 The base rate fallacy
3.8 The small numbers fallacy
3.9 Regression to the mean fallacy
3.10 Gambler's fallacy

Chapter 4: Informal fallacies

4.1 Formal vs. informal fallacies
4.1.1 Composition fallacy
4.1.2 Division fallacy
4.1.3 Begging the question fallacy
4.1.4 False dichotomy
4.1.5 Equivocation
4.2 Slippery slope fallacies
4.2.1 Conceptual slippery slope
4.2.2 Causal slippery slope
4.3 Fallacies of relevance
4.3.1 Ad hominem
4.3.2 Straw man
4.3.3 Tu quoque
4.3.4 Genetic
4.3.5 Appeal to consequences
4.3.6 Appeal to authority

Answers to exercises Glossary/Index

Ancillary Material

About the book.

This is an introductory textbook in logic and critical thinking. The goal of the textbook is to provide the reader with a set of tools and skills that will enable them to identify and evaluate arguments. The book is intended for an introductory course that covers both formal and informal logic. As such, it is not a formal logic textbook, but is closer to what one would find marketed as a “critical thinking textbook.”

About the Contributors

Matthew Van Cleave , PhD, Philosophy, University of Cincinnati, 2007. VAP at Concordia College (Moorhead), 2008-2012. Assistant Professor at Lansing Community College, 2012-2016. Professor at Lansing Community College, 2016-

Contribute to this Page

Aptitude Tests Preparation
Critical Thinking Tests

Critical Thinking Test Practice ▷ Free Critical Reasoning Samples & Tips 2024

Start Preparing for Your Critical Thinking Test. This page features a brief introduction, followed by question examples with detailed explanations, and a free test sample.

Table of Contents :

✻ What is a Critical Thinking Test ?

✻ Sample Questions

1) Inference

In this section, you are asked to draw conclusions from observed or supposed facts. You are presented with a short text containing a set of facts you should consider as true.

Below the text is a statement that could be inferred from the text. You need to make a judgement on whether this statement is valid or not, based on what you have read.

Furthermore, you are asked to evaluate whether the statement is true, probably true, there is insufficient data to determine, probably false, or false.

For example: if a baby is crying and it is his feeding time, you may infer that the baby is hungry. However, the baby may be crying for other reasons—perhaps it is hot.

2) Recognising Assumptions

In this section, you are asked to recognise whether an assumption is justifiable or not.

Here you are given a statement followed by an assumption on that statement. You need to establish whether this assumption can be supported by the statement or not.

You are being tested on your ability to avoid taking things for granted that are not necessarily true. For example, you may say, "I’ll have the same job in three months," but you would be taking for granted the fact that your workplace won't make you redundant, or that you won’t decide to quit and explore various other possibilities.

You are asked to choose between the options of assumption made and assumption not made.

3) Deduction

This section tests your ability to weigh information and decide whether given conclusions are warranted.

You are presented with a statement of facts followed by a conclusion on what you have read. For example, you may be told, "Nobody in authority can avoid making uncomfortable decisions."

You must then decide whether a statement such as "All people must make uncomfortable decisions" is warranted from the first statement.

You need to assess whether the conclusion follows or the conclusion does not follow what is contained in the statement. You can read more about our deductive logical thinking test resources here.

4) Interpretation

This section measures your ability to understand the weighing of different arguments on a particular question or issue.

You are given a short paragraph to read, which you are expected to take as true. This paragraph is followed by a suggested conclusion, for which you must decide if it follows beyond a reasonable doubt.

You have the choice of conclusion follows and conclusion does not follow.

5) Evaluation of Arguments

In this section you are asked to evaluate the strength of an argument.

You are given a question followed by an argument. The argument is considered to be true, but you must decide whether it is a strong or weak argument, i.e. whether it is both important and directly related to the question.

Create Your Own Assessment Prep Kit!

Job-seeking can be a long and frustrating process that can take several months. As part of this journey, you'll have to take a number of pre-employment tests or video interviews.

We've designed our Premium Membership to guide you through the entire journey:

Mix & match 3 PrepPacks of your choice at a 50% discount for 1 month / 3 months / 6 months.

Critical Thinking Question Examples

As there are various forms of critical thinking and critical reasoning, we've provided a number of critical thinking sample questions.

You can take our full Critical Thinking Sample Test to see more questions.

Example 1: Argument Analysis

Read the following:

In a recent study, anthropologists surveyed 250 adults who own pets and 250 adults who do not own pets on their interpersonal capacities. The questions asked of both those who own pets and those who do not own pets included tests for 'computational requirements', that is, tuning in to all the little signals necessary to operate as a couple. While members of each group displayed outstanding interpersonal capacities, in general, the adults who own pets were much more empathetic than those who do not own pets. This indicates that people who are especially empathetic are more likely to adopt a pet in spite of the personal sacrifice and the occasional inconvenience than people who are less empathetic.

Which of the following is true?

Most of the people surveyed, whether they own pets or do not own pets, displayed outstanding interpersonal capacities.
The adoption of a pet involves personal sacrifice and occasional inconvenience.
People with high degrees of empathy are more likely to adopt pets than people with low degrees of empathy.
Interpersonal capacities entail tuning in to all the little signals necessary to operate as a couple.
A person's degree of empathy is highly correlated with his or her capacity for personal sacrifice.

The correct answer is C

Answer explanation: In a question of this type, the rule is very simple: the main conclusion of an argument is found either in the first or the last sentence. If, however, the main conclusion appears in the middle of an argument, it will begin with a signal word such as thus, therefore, or so. Regardless of where the main conclusion appears, the rest of the passage will give the reasons why the conclusion is true or should be adopted. The main conclusion in this passage is the last sentence, signaled by the words, 'This indicates that people who are especially empathetic are more likely to adopt a pet than people who are less empathetic'.

Example 2: Argument Practice

A: No. Differential bonuses have been found to create a hostile working environment, which leads to a decrease in the quality and quantity of products .

This argument is:

The correct answer is A (Strong)

Schema of the statement: Differential cash bonuses (productivity↑) → workplace↑

Explanation: This argument targets both the action and the consequences of the action on the object of the statement. It states that the action (implementing differential cash bonuses) has a negative effect on the workplace (a decrease in the quality and quantity of products). Therefore, it is an important argument, one that is relevant for the workplace. Note that this argument does not specifically target differential cash bonuses. Still, they are considered a sub-group of the subject of the argument (differential bonuses).

Example 3 – Interpretations

Proposed assumption: Vicki and Bill encountered a personal battle because they couldn’t come to terms with their disease.

A. Conclusion follows

B. Conclusion does not follow

The correct answer is B (Conclusion does not follow)

It is plausible that the reason people who suffer from sleep apnoea encounter a personal battle is because of an inability to come to terms with this disease. However, since the passage does not provide an actual reason, you cannot reach this conclusion without reasonable doubt.

The most common type of Critical Thinking Assessment is the Watson Glaser .

Difficult and time-pressured, the Watsong Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) takes a unique testing approach that breaks away from more traditional assessments. To see examples, check out our free Watson Glaser practice test .

Our expertly curated practice programme for the Watson Glaser will provide you with:

A full-length diagnostic simulation
Focused practice tests for the different test sections: inferences, assumptions, deductive reasoning, interpretations, and arguments.
3 additional full-length simulations
Interactive tutorials

Or learn more about the Watson Glaser Test

Critical Thinking Tests FAQs

What critical reasoning test am I most likely to take?

Very Likely the Watson-Glaser test

Another popular critical thinking assessment, Watson-Glaser is a well-established psychometric test produced by Pearson Assessments.

The Watson-Glaser test is used for two main purposes: job selection/talent management and academic evaluations. The Watson-Glaser test can be administered online or in-person.

For Watson Glaser practice questions, click here !

What skills do critical reasoning test measure?

Critical Thinking can refer to various skills:

Defining the problem
Selecting the relevant information to solve the problem
Recognising assumptions that are both written and implied in the text
Creating hypotheses and selecting the most relevant and credible solutions
Reaching valid conclusions and judging the validity of inferences

Pearson TalentLens condenses critical thinking into three major areas:

R ecognise assumptions – the ability to notice and question assumptions, recognise information gaps or unfounded logic. Basically not taking anything for granted.
E valuate arguments – the ability to analyse information objectively without letting your emotions affect your opinion.
D raw conclusions – the ability to reach focused conclusions and inferences by considering diverse information, avoiding generalisations and disregarding information that is not available.

These are abilities that employers highly value in their employees, because they come into play in many stages of problem-solving and decision-making processes in the workplace, especially in business, management and law.

Why are critical thinking tests important to employers?

Critical thinking, or critical reasoning, is important to employers because they want to see that when dealing with an issue, you are able to make logical decisions without involving emotions.

Being able to look past emotions will help you to be open-minded, confident, and decisive—making your decisions more logical and sound.

What professions use critical thinking tests?

Below are some professions that use critical thinking tests and assessments during the hiring process as well as some positions that demand critical thinking and reasoning skills:

Preparation Packs for Critical Thinking & Critical Reasoning AssessmentsThe Critical Thinking PrepPack™ provides you with the largest assembly of practice tests, study guides and tutorials.Our tests come complete with straightforward expert explanations and predictive score reports to let you know your skill level as well as your advancement.By using our materials you can significantly increase your potential within a few days and secure yourself better chances to get the job.

Don't Leave the Preparation to Your Competition

Continue Your Practice Now

Money-Back Guarantee

Are you about to apply for a role in the finance industry?

Several major banking and consulting employers evaluate their applicants using critical thinking tests, among others. Visit your potential employer's page to understand better the tests you are about to face, and start preparing today!

More on this topic
Free Watson Glaser Test & Prep Guide
Clifford-Chance Watson Glaser
Dentons Watson Glaser Test
Linklaters Watson Glaser Test
Hogan-Lovells Watson Glaser
Watson Glaser + RANA - Practice Bundle
Watson Glaser Tailored PrepPack™

What is the Critical Thinking Test?

Critical thinking practice test, take a free practice critical thinking test, practice critical thinking test.

Updated November 16, 2023

The Critical Thinking Test is a comprehensive evaluation designed to assess individuals' cognitive capacities and analytical prowess.

This formal examination, often referred to as the critical thinking assessment, is a benchmark for those aiming to demonstrate their proficiency in discernment and problem-solving.

In addition, this evaluative tool meticulously gauges a range of skills, including logical reasoning, analytical thinking, and the ability to evaluate and synthesize information.

This article will embark on an exploration of the Critical Thinking Test, elucidating its intricacies and elucidating its paramount importance. We will dissect the essential skills it measures and clarify its significance in gauging one's intellectual aptitude.

We will examine examples of critical thinking questions, illuminating the challenging scenarios that candidates encounter prompting them to navigate the complexities of thought with finesse.

Before going ahead to take the critical thinking test, let's delve into the realm of preparation. This segment serves as a crucible for honing the skills assessed in the actual examination, offering candidates a chance to refine their analytical blades before facing the real challenge. Here are some skills that will help you with the critical thinking assessment: Logical Reasoning: The practice test meticulously evaluates your ability to deduce conclusions from given information, assess the validity of arguments, and recognize patterns in logic. Analytical Thinking: Prepare to dissect complex scenarios, identify key components, and synthesize information to draw insightful conclusions—a fundamental aspect of the critical thinking assessment. Problem-Solving Proficiency: Navigate through intricate problems that mirror real-world challenges, honing your capacity to approach issues systematically and derive effective solutions. What to Expect: The Critical Thinking Practice Test is crafted to mirror the format and complexity of the actual examination. Expect a series of scenarios, each accompanied by a set of questions that demand thoughtful analysis and logical deduction. These scenarios span diverse fields, from business and science to everyday scenarios, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of your critical thinking skills. Examples of Critical Thinking Questions Scenario: In a business context, analyze the potential impacts of a proposed strategy on both short-term profitability and long-term sustainability. Question: What factors would you consider in determining the viability of the proposed strategy, and how might it affect the company's overall success? Scenario: Evaluate conflicting scientific studies on a pressing environmental issue.

Question: Identify the key methodologies and data points in each study. How would you reconcile the disparities to form an informed, unbiased conclusion?

Why Practice Matters

Engaging in the Critical Thinking Practice Test familiarizes you with the test format and cultivates a mindset geared towards agile and astute reasoning. This preparatory phase allows you to refine your cognitive toolkit, ensuring you approach the assessment with confidence and finesse.

We'll navigate through specific examples as we proceed, offering insights into effective strategies for tackling critical thinking questions. Prepare to embark on a journey of intellectual sharpening, where each practice question refines your analytical prowess for the challenges ahead.

This is a practice critical thinking test.

The test consists of three questions .

After you have answered all the questions, you will be shown the correct answers and given full explanations.

Make sure you read and fully understand each question before answering. Work quickly, but don't rush. You cannot afford to make mistakes on a real test .

If you get a question wrong, make sure you find out why and learn how to answer this type of question in the future.

Six friends are seated in a restaurant across a rectangular table. There are three chairs on each side. Adam and Dorky do not have anyone sitting to their right and Clyde and Benjamin do not have anyone sitting to their left. Adam and Benjamin are not sitting on the same side of the table.

If Ethan is not sitting next to Dorky, who is seated immediately to the left of Felix?

You might also be interested in these other PRT articles:

15 Free Psychometric Test Questions and Answers

Translate this page from English...

*Machine translated pages not guaranteed for accuracy. Click Here for our professional translations.

Critical Thinking: Basic Questions & Answers

How Do I Select the Most Appropriate Writer to Write My Essay?

The second you place your "write an essay for me" request, numerous writers will be bidding on your work. It is up to you to choose the right specialist for your task. Make an educated choice by reading their bios, analyzing their order stats, and looking over their reviews. Our essay writers are required to identify their areas of interest so you know which professional has the most up-to-date knowledge in your field. If you are thinking "I want a real pro to write essay for me" then you've come to the right place.

Finished Papers

Rebecca Geach

Emery Evans

COMMENTS

10 Critical-Thinking Interview Questions (With Sample Answers)
A sign of strong critical thinking is the ability to maintain your use of logic and reasoning to make the right choice, even within time constraints. Answer this question with a situation where a quick decision resulted in a positive outcome. Example: "One time, my manager had to leave the office an hour before a scheduled presentation.
10 Logical Questions You Might Be Asked in an Interview
Logical interview questions involve solving brainteasers or some type of riddle to show the interviewer your critical thinking skills, problem-solving skills and analytical skills. Logic questions for interview purposes can be used to assess these skillsets as well as gauge the way you ask for information, use resources and work under pressure.
9 Interview Questions That Assess Critical Thinking (With ...
Related: 6 Ways to Improve Critical Thinking at Work Share a time you had to use critical thinking to solve a problem. Employers ask this question to determine if you've actually had to use critical thinking to find a solution. Think of a time you had to deeply think about a problem. Share what your process was with the interviewer.
Logic & Critical Thinking Final Exam Flashcards
Logic & Critical Thinking Final Exam. Explain the difference between epistemic aim of belief and other possible aims, such as pragmatic and moral aims. Give an example of how the epistemic aim can conflict with another aim. Stroud: argues that friendship raises a dilemma for us; it seems that part of being a good friend is being inclined to ...
Logical Interview Questions With Sample Answers
With riddles, the correct answer is often not the most important aspect. The interviewer asks these types of questions to assess your ability to think creatively, problem-solve with unique approaches and use your critical thinking skills to create solutions. Related: 6 Brain Teaser Interview Questions and How to Answer Them 2. Numeracy problems
10 Critical Thinking Interview Questions (With Sample Answers)
To ensure you're ready for your interview, here are 10 common critical thinking questions interviewers may ask to test your skills, along with sample answers to help you prepare your own: 1. Describe one of the most difficult decisions you have had to make at work. Interviewers ask this question to assess your experience with making challenging ...
21 Puzzle Interview Questions (With Example Answers)
Interview puzzles can encompass a variety of distinct problems, although most resemble the three main types of puzzles, which include: 1. Heaven's gate riddle question. Interviewers may present this puzzle much like a riddle or question, with a trick answer. These puzzles may assess your ability to apply logical thinking to solve the problem ...
Logical Questions and Answers: Examples and Insights
What Are Logical Questions? Logical interview questions pose concepts and problems that require reasoning, analytical, and critical thinking skills, like riddles and mathematical problems. They allow a hiring manager to assess your ability to think under pressure, use your available resources or ask additional questions to help inform your answer or decision.
Critical Thinking Test Assessment
228 questions. Critical thinking tests, sometimes known as critical reasoning tests, are often used by employers. They evaluate how a candidate makes logical deductions after scrutinising the evidence provided, while avoiding fallacies or non-factual opinions. Critical thinking tests can form part of an assessment day, or be used as a screening ...
Top 20 Logical Thinking Interview Questions & Answers
2. Describe a scenario in which you used deductive reasoning to make a decision. For roles that require problem-solving and critical thinking, deductive reasoning is a key skill. This type of reasoning allows you to logically deduce the outcome of a situation based on a set of given premises.
Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking
This is an introductory textbook in logic and critical thinking. The goal of the textbook is to provide the reader with a set of tools and skills that will enable them to identify and evaluate arguments. The book is intended for an introductory course that covers both formal and informal logic. As such, it is not a formal logic textbook, but is closer to what one would find marketed as a ...
Critical Thinking Test Free Practice 28 Questions + Score Report
Answer. The correct answer is C. Answer explanation: In a question of this type, the rule is very simple: the main conclusion of an argument is found either in the first or the last sentence. If, however, the main conclusion appears in the middle of an argument, it will begin with a signal word such as thus, therefore, or so.
Critical Thinking Test: Free Practice Questions
PRT Critical Thinking Test: question 1 of 3. Six friends are seated in a restaurant across a rectangular table. There are three chairs on each side. Adam and Dorky do not have anyone sitting to their right and Clyde and Benjamin do not have anyone sitting to their left. Adam and Benjamin are not sitting on the same side of the table.
Critical Thinking: Basic Questions & Answers
Two things are crucial: 1) critical thinking is not just thinking, but thinking which entails self-improvement. 2) this improvement comes from skill in using standards by which one appropriately assesses thinking. To put it briefly, it is self-improvement (in thinking) through standards (that assess thinking).
Indeed Logic And Critical Thinking Test Answers
Indeed Logic And Critical Thinking Test Answers - Degree: Master. Nursing Business and Economics Psychology Management +86. Susanne. ... Indeed Logic And Critical Thinking Test Answers, Custom Research Paper Editor For Hire For School, Research Paper On Modern Philosophy, Como Hacer Un Curriculum Vitae Documentado, University Editor Sites Usa ...

Get 25% off all test packages!

Critical Thinking Tests

What is a critical thinking test?

What does critical thinking mean?

Which professions use critical thinking tests, and why?

The format of the test: which skills are tested?

Assumptions

Interpretation

Evaluation of Arguments

How best to prepare for a critical thinking test

Publishers of critical thinking tests

SHL critical reasoning test

Cornell critical thinking test

Prepare yourself for leading employers

5 Example critical thinking practice questions with answers

Sample Critical Thinking Tests question Test your knowledge!

Start your success journey

Hire better talent

Critical Thinking Tests Tips

2 Fact vs fallacy

3 Ignore what you already know

4 Read everything carefully

5 Stay aware of the time you've taken

Prepare for your Watson Glaser Test

Critical Thinking Tests FAQs

How do you know if you have good critical thinking skills?

Reviews of our Watson Glaser tests

Doesn't cover all aspects of Watson-Glaser tests but useful

Just practicing for an interview

Aptitude test

Some of the ratios were harder than I thought!

Mental arithmetic

Analytics are the best questions

Interesting

Population/exchange rates were the hardest

More attention to detail + be more time conscious

Top 20 Logical Thinking Interview Questions & Answers

Common Logical Thinking Interview Questions

2. Describe a scenario in which you used deductive reasoning to make a decision.

3. What strategies do you employ when faced with a complex problem lacking clear direction?

4. In what ways have you applied Occam’s Razor principle in real-life situations?

5. Can you provide an example of how you’ve utilized inductive reasoning in your professional experience?

6. Detail a time when you had to distinguish between correlation and causation in your work.

7. What is your process for validating assumptions before making a critical decision?

8. Share an instance where you identified a logical fallacy in a team member’s argument and how you addressed it.

9. When confronted with multiple solutions, how do you determine the most effective path forward?

10. Illustrate how you handle situations where logic and emotion are at odds in decision-making.

11. Outline a method you use to prioritize tasks when all appear equally important.

12. Recall a complex project where you had to apply sequential logic; what was your strategy?

13. How do you assess the validity of information sources when conducting research?

14. Provide an example of how you’ve broken down a ‘wicked problem’ into manageable parts.

15. What techniques do you utilize to forecast potential outcomes of decisions you make?

16. How have you dealt with scenarios where insufficient data was available to make a logical conclusion?

17. Give an account of a time when you had to adapt your thinking due to changing circumstances.

18. Describe your thought process when analyzing the risk vs. reward in significant initiatives.

19. What steps do you take to ensure unbiased reasoning when evaluating different viewpoints?

20. How do you maintain clarity and focus when dealing with abstract concepts or problems?

Top 20 Quantitative Trading Interview Questions & Answers

Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking

Formats Available

Table of Contents

Ancillary Material

About the Contributors

Contribute to this Page

Critical Thinking Test Practice ▷ Free Critical Reasoning Samples & Tips 2024

1) Inference

2) Recognising Assumptions

3) Deduction

4) Interpretation

5) Evaluation of Arguments

Create Your Own Assessment Prep Kit!

Example 1: Argument Analysis

Example 2: Argument Practice

Example 3 – Interpretations

What critical reasoning test am I most likely to take?

What skills do critical reasoning test measure?

Why are critical thinking tests important to employers?

What professions use critical thinking tests?

What is the Critical Thinking Test?

Critical Thinking: Basic Questions & Answers