Graduate Record Examinations (GRE) Verbal Reasoning: Reading Comprehension Syllabus

How can you identify the conclusion of an argument on the GRE?

Look for the claim that the rest of the statements support—often signaled by words like 'therefore', 'thus', 'hence', 'so', or 'clearly'. A test: the conclusion is what remains when you ask 'what point is all this evidence trying to prove?'

How do you identify a premise (evidence) within an argument?

Premises are the supporting statements that give reasons for the conclusion, often introduced by words like 'because', 'since', 'for', 'given that', or 'as shown by'. They answer 'why should I believe the conclusion?'

What is an assumption in an argument, and why does it matter for GRE questions?

An assumption is an unstated premise the argument needs in order for its conclusion to follow from its evidence. It matters because many GRE questions (strengthen, weaken, assumption, flaw) hinge on the gap between stated evidence and conclusion that the assumption fills.

What does a 'strengthen the argument' question ask, and what makes a correct strengthener?

It asks which statement, if true, makes the conclusion more likely. A correct strengthener supports the author's assumption, rules out an alternative explanation, or adds confirming evidence linking the premises to the conclusion.

What does a 'weaken the argument' question ask, and what makes a correct weakener?

It asks which statement, if true, makes the conclusion less likely. A correct weakener attacks the key assumption, offers an alternative explanation for the evidence, or shows the evidence does not actually support the conclusion.

In strengthen/weaken questions, why is attacking or supporting the assumption the most powerful move?

Because the argument's validity depends on its unstated assumption. Undermining that assumption collapses the link between premises and conclusion (strongest weakener), while confirming it secures that link (strongest strengthener)—more decisive than adding peripheral facts.

What is an 'evaluate the argument' question, and how do you recognize the correct answer?

It asks what information would help judge whether the argument is sound. The correct answer is typically a question whose differing answers would respectively strengthen or weaken the argument—i.e., it identifies the issue the argument's validity turns on.

Name three common reasoning flaws tested on the GRE.

Common flaws include: correlation-mistaken-for-causation (assuming one event caused another just because they co-occur), unrepresentative sampling/hasty generalization, and confusing necessary with sufficient conditions. Others include circular reasoning, false dichotomy, and equivocation.

Describe the correlation-vs-causation flaw and how to weaken an argument that commits it.

The argument observes that two things occur together and concludes one causes the other. Weaken it by proposing an alternative cause, showing reversed causation, or showing the correlation is coincidental—any of which breaks the assumed causal link.

What is a sampling (representativeness) flaw, and how is it exploited in weaken questions?

It occurs when a conclusion about a whole population is drawn from a sample that may not represent it. Weaken such an argument by showing the sample is biased, too small, or atypical, so its results cannot be generalized to the larger group.

What does an 'identify the role of a statement' (bolded/described portion) question ask on the GRE?

It asks what function a specified statement serves in the argument—e.g., it is the main conclusion, a premise supporting the conclusion, an objection the author rebuts, evidence the author concedes, or an intermediate conclusion.

List the typical roles a statement can play in a GRE argument that 'role' questions test.

Main conclusion; supporting premise/evidence; intermediate (sub) conclusion that also supports the main conclusion; a counter-position or objection the author argues against; a concession; background context; or an assumption the argument relies on.

How do you distinguish a main conclusion from an intermediate conclusion in a role question?

The main conclusion is supported by other statements but supports nothing further; an intermediate conclusion is supported by a premise yet itself serves as support for the main conclusion. Trace the 'support' arrows: the statement everything ultimately points to is the main conclusion.

What is the recommended order for engaging a long GRE passage and its questions?

Read the passage actively for structure and main idea first (noting purpose, tone, and the function of each paragraph) without memorizing details, then go to the questions and return to the text to locate specifics as needed.

For 'one or more answers' questions, why must you evaluate each of the three choices independently?

Because each choice is true or false on its own and any combination can be correct, you must judge every option against the passage separately rather than picking 'the best one'. Treating it as a single-answer question risks missing additional correct choices or including a wrong one.

What distinguishes a 'too broad' wrong answer from a 'too narrow' wrong answer on main-idea questions?

A too-broad answer claims a scope larger than the passage covers (introducing topics the passage never fully addresses); a too-narrow answer captures only one detail or paragraph rather than the whole. The correct answer matches the passage's exact scope.

On the GRE, what is the 'out of scope' trap answer, and where does it appear most?

An out-of-scope choice introduces information, comparisons, or topics not discussed in the passage. It is a frequent trap in main-idea, inference, and detail questions; reject it because nothing in the text supports it.

How do 'EXCEPT' or 'NOT' style RC questions change your approach?

For questions like 'All of the following are stated EXCEPT', four choices are supported by the passage and you select the one that is not. Verify each choice against the text; the credited answer is the one you cannot find support for.

What is the difference between what an author 'states' and what an author 'implies' on the GRE?

A stated point is explicitly written in the passage; an implied point is suggested but not directly written, requiring you to read tone, word choice, or logical consequence. Implication questions are a subtype of inference.

Why should you predict an answer before reading the choices on GRE RC questions?

Predicting (forming your own answer from the passage first) reduces susceptibility to well-crafted trap choices. You then match the choice closest to your prediction, rather than being swayed by distractors that sound plausible but distort the text.

What role do transition and signal words (e.g., 'however', 'moreover', 'consequently') play in reading GRE passages?

They map the logical structure: 'however/yet/but' signal contrast or a shift/objection; 'moreover/furthermore' signal added support; 'therefore/consequently' signal a conclusion; 'because/since' signal evidence. Tracking them reveals the argument's flow and the author's stance.

For a select-in-passage question asking for the sentence that 'provides support for the author's claim,' how do you verify your choice?

Confirm the sentence functions as evidence (a premise) for the stated claim, not as the claim itself or as background. Check that removing it would weaken the support for that specific claim, and that it directly relates to the claim named in the question.

What is the difference between an argument's 'conclusion' and its 'primary purpose' in the broader passage sense?

In a short argument, the conclusion is the specific claim the premises support. In a longer passage, the primary purpose is the author's overall rhetorical goal (e.g., 'to refute a theory'). A passage can have a primary purpose without stating a single argumentative conclusion.

How do you handle an inference question when two choices both seem supported by the passage?

Pick the choice that requires the smaller, more direct logical step and is fully guaranteed by the text. Eliminate the choice that needs an extra unstated assumption, overstates the claim, or goes beyond the passage's scope, even slightly.

What is a 'false dichotomy' flaw, and how might a GRE argument commit it?

A false dichotomy assumes only two options exist when others are possible, then concludes one must hold because the other fails. A GRE argument commits it by ruling out one alternative and treating its preferred option as the only remaining possibility; weaken it by showing a third option exists.

Distinguish 'necessary' from 'sufficient' conditions, a distinction GRE flaw questions exploit.

A necessary condition must be present for an outcome but does not alone guarantee it; a sufficient condition, if present, guarantees the outcome. An argument is flawed if it treats a necessary condition as sufficient (or vice versa), e.g., concluding an outcome will occur merely because a necessary requirement is met.

When a passage presents two competing views, what should you track to answer structure and tone questions?

Track which view the author endorses, which the author critiques, and the evidence given for each. The author's tone toward each view (and any concession or rebuttal) often determines the answers to purpose, attitude, and role questions.

What is the best way to deal with a dense, technical GRE passage on an unfamiliar topic?

Focus on structure and function rather than mastering the technical content: note what each paragraph does, the author's purpose and attitude, and where key claims/contrasts sit. You can return to decode technical details only when a specific question requires them.

On 'strengthen/weaken' questions, why must the correct choice connect to the specific conclusion, not just the topic?

A choice can mention the right subject yet not affect the conclusion's likelihood. Only a choice that bears on the link between the given evidence and that exact conclusion counts; topic-relevant but logically irrelevant statements are traps.

Summarize a disciplined four-step method for any GRE RC question.

(1) Identify the question type (main idea, detail, inference, tone, structure, strengthen/weaken, role, vocab-in-context). (2) Predict an answer from the passage. (3) Use the question type's standard (stated vs. must-be-true vs. tone words) to evaluate choices. (4) Eliminate out-of-scope, extreme, and distorted choices, then select the one fully supported by the text.