Practice Test Geeks(PPAER) Public and Police Aptitude and Evaluation Report Practice Test
← All PPAER Flashcard Decks

Logical and Deductive Reasoning Flashcards

7 cards from real PPAER practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.

Read the first 7 Logical and Deductive Reasoning flashcards as text

  1. A sergeant reviews shifts: morning officers handle traffic; evening officers handle patrol. Officer Diaz handles patrol. During which shift does Officer Diaz most likely work?

    Answer: Evening

    Patrol is associated with the evening shift, so Diaz most likely works evenings.

  2. Statement: 'Whenever the downtown unit is understaffed, response times increase.' The downtown unit is fully staffed today. What can be concluded?

    Answer: Response times may or may not increase today

    The conditional only tells us what happens when understaffed; it says nothing about response times when fully staffed.

  3. Crime scene analysts say the fire started between 9 PM and 11 PM. A witness places the arson suspect elsewhere at 10 PM. What is the logical conclusion?

    Answer: The witness testimony narrows but may not eliminate the suspect

    The alibi covers only 10 PM within a two-hour window, leaving opportunity outside that specific time.

  4. All officers who received commendations this year attended advanced training. Officer Park received a commendation. What follows?

    Answer: Officer Park attended advanced training

    Since all commended officers attended advanced training and Park was commended, Park attended the training.

  5. A logical sequence: Red → Stop, Yellow → Caution, Green → Go. A driver stopped at a green light. Which is the most logical explanation?

    Answer: The driver violated the logical rule

    Under the stated rules, green means go, so stopping at green violates the logical sequence.

  6. An investigator concludes: 'The victim knew the attacker because the door showed no forced entry.' Which assumption underlies this reasoning?

    Answer: Unlocked doors mean the victim let someone in willingly

    The investigator assumes no forced entry indicates voluntary access, implying familiarity between victim and attacker.

  7. Five suspects were interviewed. Suspects 1-4 gave consistent accounts placing themselves together. Suspect 5 contradicts them. What is the most logical inference?

    Answer: The group of four may be colluding or Suspect 5 may be mistaken

    Consistent group accounts could indicate collusion or accuracy; Suspect 5's contradiction could reflect honesty or error without additional evidence.