Because justifying a conclusion is such a specific task, the logic behind the question must
allow for airtight provability.
Stimuli that contain numbers or percentages in the stimulus also allow for the exactitude these
questions require.
Because logically proving an argument is a difficult task that requires 100%
certainty, only certain types of argumentation tend to appear in Justify stimuli. In
fact, most Justify stimuli either use Conditional Reasoning or contain numbers
and percentages. Why? Because both forms of reasoning allow for certainty
when drawing a conclusion. Consider the following example, which contains
conditional reasoning:
Premise: A
Premise: A------------> B
Conclusion: B
This example can quickly be turned into a Justify the Conclusion question by
removing either premise. For example:
Premise: A occurs.
Conclusion: B occurs.
Question: What statement can be added to the argument above to
conclude that B must follow?
Answer: A-------------> B
Or, the other premise could be removed:
Premise: A-------------> B
Conclusion: B occurs.
Question: What statement can be added to the argument above to
conclude that B must follow?
Answer: A occurs.
When examined abstractly, many Justify the Conclusion questions work in just
this way. Please take a moment to consider the following question:
1. Maria won this year’s local sailboat race by beating
Sue, the winner in each of the four previous years. We
can conclude from this that Maria trained hard.
The conclusion follows logically if which one of the
following is assumed?
(A) Sue did not train as hard as Maria trained.
(B) If Maria trained hard, she would win the
sailboat race.
(C) Maria could beat a four-time winner only if she
trained hard.
(D) If Sue trained hard, she would win the sailboat
race.
(E) Sue is usually a faster sailboat racer than Maria.
The structure of the argument is:
allow for airtight provability.
Stimuli that contain numbers or percentages in the stimulus also allow for the exactitude these
questions require.
Because logically proving an argument is a difficult task that requires 100%
certainty, only certain types of argumentation tend to appear in Justify stimuli. In
fact, most Justify stimuli either use Conditional Reasoning or contain numbers
and percentages. Why? Because both forms of reasoning allow for certainty
when drawing a conclusion. Consider the following example, which contains
conditional reasoning:
Premise: A
Premise: A------------> B
Conclusion: B
This example can quickly be turned into a Justify the Conclusion question by
removing either premise. For example:
Premise: A occurs.
Conclusion: B occurs.
Question: What statement can be added to the argument above to
conclude that B must follow?
Answer: A-------------> B
Or, the other premise could be removed:
Premise: A-------------> B
Conclusion: B occurs.
Question: What statement can be added to the argument above to
conclude that B must follow?
Answer: A occurs.
When examined abstractly, many Justify the Conclusion questions work in just
this way. Please take a moment to consider the following question:
1. Maria won this year’s local sailboat race by beating
Sue, the winner in each of the four previous years. We
can conclude from this that Maria trained hard.
The conclusion follows logically if which one of the
following is assumed?
(A) Sue did not train as hard as Maria trained.
(B) If Maria trained hard, she would win the
sailboat race.
(C) Maria could beat a four-time winner only if she
trained hard.
(D) If Sue trained hard, she would win the sailboat
race.
(E) Sue is usually a faster sailboat racer than Maria.
The structure of the argument is:
