Articles published in Critical Reasoning

Here’s What to Do When You Don’t Know What to Do on the GMAT

by

blog-what-to-doYou’re staring at a GMAT problem that you just don’t understand. There’s a minute left on the clock. What do you do? Read more

How to Master Every GMAT Critical Reasoning Question Type

by

blog-master-crHas GMAT Critical Reasoning been driving you crazy? Do you keep getting tangled up in arguments, agonizing back and forth between answers, or picking an answer confidently only to find that you fell straight into a trap? This article is here to save you. ☺️

It’s going to take some work, but if you follow these steps, you’ll see your CR performance improve significantly. Ready? Let’s do this! Read more

GMAT Critical Reasoning Problems: Benefit/Drawback Arguments

by

blog-benefitHere are a few benefit/drawback arguments: Read more

Can you fix this GMAT Critical Reasoning discrepancy?

by

blog-discrepancyThe GMAT Critical Reasoning question type “Explain a Discrepancy” has a very specific goal. If you know what your goal is, you’ll be much more likely to answer the question correctly. If you don’t, it can be very easy to get turned around and fall into a trap.

Try this problem from the free questions that come with the GMATPrep® software and then we’ll talk about how Discrepancy questions work! Read more

GMAT Critical Reasoning Problems: Arguments That Tell You Why

by

Blog-GMATArgumentThere are really only a dozen different Critical Reasoning problems in the Official Guide to the GMAT. The test writers recycle the same basic argument structures over and over, and they use the same right answers over and over, too. Even though the topics change — an argument might be about school funding the first time you see it, and industrial efficiency the next — you can sometimes recognize the underlying structure, outsmart the test, and earn some well-deserved points on the Verbal section. Read more

Here’s why you should interleave your GMAT studies (and what that means)

by

Blog-InterleaveRecently, I wrote a post about how to get the most out of Official Guide (OG) problems during your studies. In that article, I discussed the concept of Interleaving your studies and I’ve got more to say on this strategy that’s of crucial importance to your studies.

What is Interleaving?

In a nutshell, interleaving is a way of mixing up your studies. For example, let’s say that you’re about to start studying the Fractions chapter of our Fractions, Decimals, & Percents (FDP) Strategy Guide. It’s only 8 pages long, so you should just read the whole thing straight through, right? (Note: if you actually have this guide,  pull it out right now and follow along below.) Read more

Manhattan Prep’s GMAT® study app is now available!

by

I am very excited to announce that our new GMAT® study app is available on both iOS and Android!


Download now!

iOS

Android


Read more

How to Tackle Every Single GMAT Problem (Seriously!) – Part 5

by

Blog-Tackle-Pt5Welcome to part 5 of our series on how to answer every single GMAT problem you’ll ever see. :) If you haven’t already read the earlier installments, start with part 1 and work your way back to me.

Last time, I left you with a Critical Reasoning question from the free questions that come with the GMATPrep® software. Let’s talk about it! Read more

Everything you need to know about the New Official Guides, Part 4

by

I’ve just finished trying all of the new verbal OG problems. (If you haven’t yet read my earlier installments, start here.) This installment includes my summary of All Things Verbal as well as lists of the new problems by book and question type.

Also, we’re hard at work writing new solutions to add to our GMAT Navigator program, so if you have access to Navigator, you can start to check for new solutions there in—best guess—July.

What’s new in Verbal?

Now that I’ve seen everything, I’ve been able to spot some trends across all of the added and dropped questions. For example, across both The Official Guide for GMAT® Review (aka the big book) and The Official Guide for GMAT® Verbal Review (aka verbal-only or the verbal supplement), 6 science passages were added (out of 11 new passages total), while only 3 were dropped. In addition, 3 social science passages were added (compared to 5 dropped) and 2 business passages were added (compared to 2 dropped).

So, in the books at least, there’s a slight shift towards science. It’s unclear whether this signals an actual change in emphasis on the test, though; these may just be the best retired passages that they wanted to use.

For Critical Reasoning, the same total number of questions were added and dropped. The differential (added minus dropped) for Strengthen questions was +8. Further, 6 of the 22 total new Strengthen questions are fill in the blank (FitB) format, and no new FiTB’s were introduced that were not Strengthen questions.

The differential for Weaken questions was -8 and for Inference questions, it was -4. I’m not entirely sure what to make of the drop in Weaken. I’ve been hearing from students that they’ve been seeing a lot of Strengthen / Weaken on the real test and not many (CR) Inference questions. The Strengthen jump and the small Inference drop seems to go along with that, but not the larger Weaken drop. (This is why I’m always skeptical about drawing broader conclusions based on changes in the books.)

As I mentioned in my first report on Sentence Correction (part 2 of this series), it is difficult to compare categories here because one SC can (and usually does) cross multiple topics. The trends I reported before still hold after my review of the Verbal supplement: meaning and sentence structure are increasingly important, and parallelism and comparisons are just as important as they’ve always been.

Ready for the problem lists?

Read more

How to Infer on the GMAT

by

2-11-ScienceWe’re going to kill two birds with one stone in this week’s article.

Inference questions pop up on both Critical Reasoning (CR) and Reading Comprehension (RC), so you definitely want to master these. Good news: the kind of thinking the test-writers want is the same for both question types. Learn how to do Inference questions on one type and you’ll know what you need to do for the other!

That’s actually only one bird. Here’s the second: both CR and RC can give you science-based text, and that science-y text can get pretty confusing. How can you avoid getting sucked into the technical detail, yet still be able to answer the question asked? Read on.

Try this GMATPrep® CR problem out (it’s from the free practice tests) and then we’ll talk about it. Give yourself about 2 minutes (though it’s okay to stretch to 2.5 minutes on a CR as long as you are making progress.)

“Increases in the level of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) in the human bloodstream lower bloodstream cholesterol levels by increasing the body’s capacity to rid itself of excess cholesterol. Levels of HDL in the bloodstream of some individuals are significantly increased by a program of regular exercise and weight reduction.

“Which of the following can be correctly inferred from the statements above?

“(A) Individuals who are underweight do not run any risk of developing high levels of cholesterol in the bloodstream.

“(B) Individuals who do not exercise regularly have a high risk of developing high levels of cholesterol in the bloodstream late in life.

“(C) Exercise and weight reduction are the most effective methods of lowering bloodstream cholesterol levels in humans.

“(D) A program of regular exercise and weight reduction lowers cholesterol levels in the bloodstream of some individuals.

“(E) Only regular exercise is necessary to decrease cholesterol levels in the bloodstream of individuals of average weight.”

Got an answer? (If not, pick one anyway. Pretend it’s the real test and just make a guess.) Before we dive into the solution, let’s talk a little bit about what Inference questions are asking us to do.

Inference questions are sometimes also called Draw a Conclusion questions. I don’t like that title, though, because it can be misleading. Think about a typical CR argument: they usually include a conclusion that is…well…not a solid conclusion. There are holes in the argument, and then they ask you to Strengthen it or Weaken it or something like that.
Read more