Critical Reasoning Inference Paradox Evaluate and Method of Reasoning Practice Questions | GMAT Verbal Reasoning

Critical Reasoning Inference Paradox Evaluate and Method of Reasoning

Question 1 of 30

Time left: 00:00

Argument:

A city councilor argues: “Because the city spent $12 million upgrading downtown sidewalks last year, foot traffic rose by 9% over the same period. Therefore, the sidewalk upgrades caused the increase in foot traffic, and the city should fund a similar sidewalk project in every neighborhood to boost local business activity.”

Which of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?

Select one option.

If the city does not fund similar sidewalk projects in every neighborhood, local business activity will decline.
The sidewalk upgrades were the only change in downtown during the year in which foot traffic rose by 9%.
At least some portion of the 9% increase in downtown foot traffic could have occurred even if the sidewalks had not been upgraded.
The councilor’s conclusion that the sidewalk upgrades caused the increase in foot traffic does not logically follow from the evidence provided.
Most neighborhoods would experience a larger increase in foot traffic than downtown did if they received similar sidewalk upgrades.

You have used 0 of 1 attempt

Next ▶