Critical Thinking & Argument Analysis Flashcards
7 cards from real AWA practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Critical Thinking & Argument Analysis flashcards as text
A survey of 50 customers shows 80% prefer Product X. The company concludes all customers prefer Product X. What flaw does this reasoning contain?
Answer: The sample size is too small and may not represent all customers
Drawing a universal conclusion from a small, potentially unrepresentative sample is a hasty generalization.
Which strategy is most effective when the AWA prompt asks you to analyze an argument's logical structure?
Answer: Identify the conclusion, premises, assumptions, and then evaluate each for logical gaps
A systematic breakdown of conclusion, premises, and assumptions is the foundation of a strong AWA argument analysis essay.
An executive argues: 'Our best-selling product was designed by Team A, so Team A should lead all future projects.' What flawed reasoning is present?
Answer: Generalizing from one success to universal superiority without considering other factors
One success does not prove Team A will outperform in all contexts; market conditions, product type, and luck may have contributed.
In a well-constructed AWA critique, what is the primary purpose of proposing what additional evidence would strengthen an argument?
Answer: To demonstrate you understand what evidence would address the argument's logical gaps
Suggesting strengthening evidence shows you can identify what is missing and articulate what would make the reasoning more sound.
An argument states: 'Violent video games cause aggression because teenagers who play them are more aggressive.' What logical error is committed?
Answer: Circular reasoning—the claim restates the premise without providing independent evidence
The argument uses the observed aggression as both the evidence and the conclusion, which is circular.
Which of the following is the strongest counterexample to the claim: 'Stricter gun laws always reduce gun violence'?
Answer: A country with strict gun laws that has a higher gun violence rate than some countries with looser laws
A single clear counterexample—a country with strict laws but high violence—directly disproves the absolute claim 'always reduces.'
When an AWA argument relies on an analogy (e.g., 'This worked in City A, so it will work in City B'), what is the key question to ask?
Answer: Whether the two situations are similar enough in relevant ways for the comparison to hold
Analogies are only valid when the compared situations share the features that matter most for the outcome being predicted.