Practice Analytical Writing questions for the Graduate Record Examinations. Every question includes a full explanation of why the correct answer is right and why the tempting distractors are wrong.
10 example questions with full explanations. Use the interactive practice above to work through the complete set.
Question 1hard
A city council report argues: 'Crime rates in Millvale dropped 22% in the two years after the city installed streetlights in its downtown corridor. Therefore, expanding the streetlight program citywide will reduce overall crime by a similar margin.' Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion of this argument?
- A.Streetlights require significant ongoing maintenance costs that may strain the city's budget.
- B.During the same two-year period, the city also hired 40 additional police officers who were deployed exclusively in the downtown corridor.✓
- C.Residents of neighborhoods outside the downtown corridor have repeatedly requested improved lighting in public surveys.
- D.Studies conducted in other cities have shown mixed results regarding the relationship between lighting and crime.
Correct answer: B
The argument assumes that the streetlights caused the crime reduction, but answer B reveals a confounding variable — the simultaneous deployment of 40 additional police officers — that provides an equally or more plausible explanation for the drop in crime. This directly attacks the causal claim. Answer A raises a cost concern but does not undermine the causal logic. Answer C actually supports expanding the program rather than weakening it. Answer D is tempting but too vague; 'mixed results' doesn't specifically undermine the correlation established in Millvale the way a direct confound does.
Question 2hard
The following argument appears in a business memo: 'Our competitor, Nexalon, adopted a four-day workweek and subsequently reported a 15% increase in employee productivity. We should therefore adopt a four-day workweek so that our productivity will also increase by at least 15%.' The argument's conclusion depends on which of the following unstated assumptions?
- A.Nexalon's employees were dissatisfied with their previous five-day schedule.
- B.A four-day workweek is the only workplace reform capable of increasing employee productivity by 15% or more.
- C.The conditions at this company — including workforce composition, industry demands, and operational structure — are sufficiently similar to Nexalon's for the same policy to produce comparable results.✓
- D.Nexalon's productivity gains were sustained over a period of at least two years after the policy was adopted.
Correct answer: C
The argument transfers a result from Nexalon directly to the memo's company, which requires the unstated assumption that the two organizations are comparable in the relevant respects. Without this assumption, Nexalon's experience provides no reliable basis for predicting the same outcome elsewhere. Answer A concerns employee sentiment at Nexalon but is not required for the argument's logic to function. Answer B introduces a false dichotomy that the argument doesn't actually commit — it never claims this is the only method. Answer D about longevity of gains is a potential concern but is not a hidden premise the argument structurally depends on.
Question 3hard
A columnist writes: 'Either we ban all advertising directed at children under twelve, or we accept that corporations will manipulate young minds for profit indefinitely. Since no reasonable society should accept the latter, a total ban is the only responsible policy.' A critic wishing to identify the central logical flaw in this argument should point out that the argument:
- A.appeals to the authority of undefined 'reasonable' societies rather than empirical evidence.
- B.assumes that children under twelve are categorically incapable of evaluating commercial messages, a claim that is not established.
- C.conflates the harmful intentions of advertisers with the actual psychological harm experienced by child viewers.
- D.presents only two options as exhaustive when intermediate regulatory positions — such as restricting certain advertising categories or requiring disclosures — are not addressed.✓
Correct answer: D
The argument is a textbook false dichotomy (false dilemma): it frames the issue as a binary choice between a total ban and unlimited corporate manipulation, ignoring the entire spectrum of regulatory middle grounds. This is the central structural flaw. Answer A is a reasonable critique of the rhetorical language but is a secondary concern — the argument could be restated without the word 'reasonable' and remain equally flawed. Answer B challenges an implicit premise but is not the primary logical flaw driving the conclusion. Answer C raises a valid conceptual distinction but is peripheral to the binary structure that forces the flawed conclusion.
Question 4hard
An editorial argues: 'Graduation rates at Harwick University rose from 71% to 79% in the five years after the university introduced mandatory academic advising for all first-year students. This demonstrates that mandatory advising programs are an effective tool for improving graduation rates and should be adopted by universities nationwide.' Which of the following pieces of evidence, if obtainable, would most strengthen the argument's conclusion?
- A.Data showing that Harwick's peer institutions, which did not introduce mandatory advising during the same period, saw no statistically significant change in their graduation rates.✓
- B.Surveys indicating that the majority of Harwick students who participated in mandatory advising reported finding the sessions personally valuable.
- C.A breakdown confirming that the 8-percentage-point gain was distributed evenly across all academic departments at Harwick.
- D.A study showing that mandatory advising programs cost less per student than other retention initiatives such as tutoring centers.
Correct answer: A
The core weakness in the argument is the absence of a control group — without one, any number of confounding factors (economic conditions, changes in admissions standards, etc.) could explain the rise in graduation rates. Answer A provides a natural control group: comparable institutions that did not adopt the policy showed no gains, which isolates mandatory advising as the likely causal factor. Answer B addresses student satisfaction, not graduation outcomes, and doesn't strengthen the causal link. Answer C tells us about distribution of gains but doesn't rule out confounds. Answer D addresses cost-effectiveness rather than causal effectiveness, which is what the argument's conclusion requires.
Question 5medium
A city council memo argues: 'We must either expand the downtown parking garage or accept that local businesses will continue to lose customers to suburban malls. Since we cannot afford the expansion, we must accept the ongoing decline of downtown commerce.' A student writing an Issue essay wants to challenge the strongest version of this argument. Which of the following responses BEST demonstrates engaging with the argument on its own terms rather than dismissing it?
- A.Pointing out that the council members may have personal financial interests in suburban mall development, which calls their objectivity into question.
- B.Acknowledging that parking access genuinely affects consumer behavior, while arguing that alternative interventions—such as improved public transit or pedestrian-friendly redesign—could achieve comparable results.✓
- C.Asserting that downtown businesses should simply improve their product offerings rather than relying on the city to solve infrastructure problems.
- D.Arguing that suburban malls also face declining foot traffic in many cities, so the comparison is not relevant to this situation.
Correct answer: B
B is correct because it concedes the legitimate concern at the heart of the argument (parking does affect customer behavior) before introducing a substantive counter-position—this is the hallmark of strong Issue task writing, which requires engaging the best version of opposing views. A attacks the speakers' motives rather than their argument (an ad hominem move). C sidesteps the council's premise entirely rather than engaging with it. D introduces an external comparison that, while potentially relevant, does not directly address whether alternatives to garage expansion exist for this city.
Question 6medium
The following argument appears in a company memo: 'Our customer satisfaction scores dropped significantly in the six months after we switched to a new call-center software platform. Clearly, the new software is responsible for the decline. We should immediately revert to the old system to restore our scores.' Which flaw in the argument's reasoning is MOST central to its weakness?
- A.The argument relies on a single metric—satisfaction scores—to judge overall company performance, when multiple indicators should be considered.
- B.The argument assumes that reverting to the old system is technically and financially feasible, without providing evidence that it is.
- C.The argument fails to consider that other factors occurring during the same period could account for the drop in satisfaction scores.✓
- D.The argument does not define what counts as a 'significant' drop in satisfaction scores, making the premise difficult to evaluate.
Correct answer: C
B identifies the core logical flaw: the argument infers causation from mere temporal sequence (post hoc ergo propter hoc), ignoring that staffing changes, product issues, or market shifts could explain the decline just as well. This is the most central flaw because without ruling out alternative causes, the conclusion is entirely unsupported.Araises a valid but secondary concern about measurement scope;Bquestions feasibility of the solution rather than the causal reasoning;Dpoints to a vagueness issue that, while real, does not undermine the argument's causal logic as directly as C does.
Question 7medium
A regional newspaper editorial states: 'Three of the five technology start-ups founded in Millbrook last year have already failed. This confirms that Millbrook is simply not a viable environment for entrepreneurship, and the city should stop investing in small business incubator programs.' The reasoning in this editorial is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
- A.The editorial does not explain what caused each of the three failed start-ups to close, so the city's environment cannot be blamed.
- B.The editorial assumes that business incubator programs are the primary driver of start-up success, without citing studies to support this claim.
- C.The editorial conflates the interests of large corporations with those of small start-ups, treating them as if they face identical challenges.
- D.The editorial draws a broad conclusion about Millbrook's entire entrepreneurial environment from a small, potentially unrepresentative sample of five companies.✓
Correct answer: D
B correctly identifies hasty generalization: drawing a sweeping conclusion about an entire city's entrepreneurial viability from only five data points is statistically and logically unsound, especially since a 40% survival rate after one year is not unusual nationally.Ais partially relevant but misidentifies the primary flaw—even if causes were known, the sample problem would remain.Bintroduces a reasonable secondary concern but targets the solution premise rather than the core inferential leap.Cdescribes a conflation that simply does not occur in the argument as stated.
Question 8medium
An argument in an education policy report concludes: 'Because standardized test scores at Lakeview Middle School rose 12% after the school adopted a longer school day, all middle schools in the state should extend their school days to improve academic outcomes.' A writer preparing to rebut this argument identifies the strongest counterargument. Which of the following BEST represents that counterargument?
- A.Lakeview's improvement may reflect unique local conditions—such as additional funding, a new principal, or a motivated parent community—that would not be present in all schools, making the policy recommendation an overgeneralization.✓
- B.Standardized tests are an imperfect measure of learning and should not be used as the sole basis for education policy decisions.
- C.Longer school days increase operational costs for districts, which may not have the budget to implement such a change statewide.
- D.Some students perform better in shorter, more intensive academic sessions, meaning a longer day could actually harm certain learners.
Correct answer: A
B is the strongest counterargument because it directly attacks the argument's inferential leap: using a single school's results to justify a statewide mandate ignores the possibility that confounding variables specific to Lakeview drove the improvement. This is both a counterargument and an identification of a hasty generalization applied to policy.Bchallenges the measurement tool but concedes the core logic of the argument.Craises a practical objection about cost but does not engage with the causal reasoning.Dintroduces a nuanced pedagogical point but is a narrower objection affecting a subset of students rather than the argument's central inferential flaw.
Question 9medium
A health magazine article argues: 'Dr. Harmon, a celebrated cardiologist with thirty years of experience, endorses Brand X omega-3 supplements as effective for reducing heart disease risk. Consumers can therefore be confident that Brand X supplements will improve their cardiovascular health.' The argument's reasoning is most weakened by which of the following considerations?
- A.The article does not state whether Dr. Harmon is compensated by Brand X, which would reveal whether the endorsement is financially motivated rather than evidence-based.
- B.The argument substitutes an expert's personal endorsement for clinical evidence that Brand X specifically has been shown to reduce heart disease risk in controlled studies.✓
- C.Heart disease is influenced by many lifestyle and genetic factors, so no single supplement can guarantee cardiovascular health improvement for all consumers.
- D.Thirty years of experience in cardiology does not necessarily mean Dr. Harmon is familiar with the nutritional supplement industry's regulatory standards.
Correct answer: B
C identifies the appeal-to-authority fallacy at the core of the argument: expertise and endorsement are used as substitutes for actual empirical evidence about this specific product. An expert's approval, however distinguished, does not replace clinical trial data demonstrating that Brand X works.Araises the important issue of conflict of interest, which would further undermine the endorsement, but it is a secondary concern about motive rather than the primary logical flaw.Cis true but attacks the scope of the conclusion rather than the reasoning structure.Dquestions the breadth of Dr. Harmon's expertise but does not address the fundamental problem that endorsement is being offered in place of evidence.
Question 10easy
A student writes: 'The new school policy must be good because it was approved by the school board, and the school board only approves good policies.' Which logical flaw does this argument commit?
- A.Hasty generalization — drawing a broad conclusion from too few examples
- B.False dichotomy — presenting only two options when more exist
- C.Circular reasoning — using the conclusion as a premise to support itself✓
- D.Ad hominem — attacking the character of the school board rather than the policy
Correct answer: C
The argument is circular: it claims the policy is good because the school board approved it, then justifies trusting the school board by asserting they only approve good policies — the conclusion is embedded in the premise, so nothing is actually proven. This is the defining feature of circular reasoning, also called 'begging the question.' Option A is wrong because no sample size is involved; option B is wrong because no either/or choice is presented; option D is wrong because no personal attack is made — the school board's judgment is treated as authoritative, not criticized.