Free Watson Glaser Test Practice With Full Answers, Explanations and Tips [2024]

Correct Answer

You know that James had paid 180 pounds in the past month alone. You also know he is a human rights activist who is willing to spend money for his cause, based on his actions and testimony.

As such, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the text, it is safe to assume that sometime in the year James had spent at least 20 more pounds on his activism, smoking-related or otherwise.

Answer

The correct answer is 'False'.

The words “marked advantage” insinuate that the ability to benefit from unsociable employees is the most significant advantage. However, that advantage is not even mentioned in the text. That means that the answer is either False or Probably False.

The text specifically mentions the benefits of face-to-face meetings on social interaction: “a workplace with virtual employees might entail miscommunication and less camaraderie and can be more time-consuming than face-to-face interaction”. The conclusion, however, refers to the problems it creates, which is negated by the general message of the passage.

Answer

The correct answer is 'Probably False'.

The passage describes an increasing trend of virtual employment hiring. Yet, it is not specified how prevalent this trend has become compared to the entire workforce. There is no confirmation or contradiction of the statement; the first tendency may be to choose 'insufficient data'.

However, in this test section, you can use common sense to choose the right answer. By applying logic to the answer choices, you can surmise that many jobs cannot be done virtually and that despite the increasing popularity of this trend, it is unlikely that a majority of most US are virtual.

Answer

The correct answer is 'Insufficient Data'.

The passage presents information about a new possible utility for cognitive ability tests in the occupational consultancy area. Yet, we lack information about the extent of past and present use of these psychometric tests; hence, it is impossible to determine and even to assume whether the statement is correct or not. Therefore, the correct answer is 'Insufficient Data'.

Correct Answer

This is a generalisation of what happened in the town. This statement is a logical rule—it refers to all service providers in the world.

The author might think this is true, but he doesn't have to assume it in order for the passage to make sense. Therefore, it is not assumed.

Answer

The correct answer is ‘Assumption Made’.

To see why the assumption is made, let’s use the Negative Test algorithm:

Step #1 – negate the assumption – “It is impossible to predict the impact of department size on business performance.”

Step #2 – check if the validity of the original statement changes. In our case, it does, since if there is no way to measure the effect of department size on business performance, any statement trying to predict such an effect is meaningless.

Step #3 – if the statement is not valid anymore, then the assumption was made.

Answer

The correct answer is ‘Assumption Not Made’.

The actual assumption is that the future holds a possibility for climate change. It is not evident that it is already happening from the text. Remember, you should not make your decision based on whether you think the assumption is true but only based on whether or not the assumption was made.

Answer

The correct answer is ‘Assumption Made’.

The second sentence presents a possible problem I might encounter in China. The third sentence presents a technical solution. Under reasonable doubt, one can conclude that the third sentence offers a solution to the possible problem. Without the above assumption, we couldn't connect the second and the third sentence.

Correct Answer

Let's solve this question with the safest possible method for solving deduction questions - Letter Coding.

Citizens = A, pay taxes = B, receive income support = C.
According to the premises, (A+B)some, and (A+C)many.

The conclusion states (A+C) > (A+B).

Some refer to a portion - a quantity between 1 to everything, while many others refer to multiplicity – at least 2 and up to everything.
However, you have no grounds to infer an accurate quantity of either statement; therefore, the conclusion does not necessarily follow.

In other words:

This one is tricky. Although there is a hierarchy between words that indicate a quantity, and “many” is more than “some”, that is only true when discussing the same group.

For example, if the conclusion was “there are some citizens who receive income support”, it would follow, because you can infer “some” from “many”. However, you cannot compare the quantities of two different groups this way.

Answer

The correct answer is ‘Conclusion Follows’.

We are going to solve these questions intuitively. However, it is strongly advised to use other, safer methods in the actual Watson Glaser test, such as Venn diagrams or Letter Coding. 

We know two facts:

• Only technological companies are listed on the OTX. This is equivalent to: All companies listed on the OTX are technological.
• No technological company remains unstable for a long period of time. This is equivalent to: All technological companies are not unstable for a long period of time.

Combining these two facts, it is easy to see that all companies on the OTX will not be unstable for a long period of time.

Answer

The correct answer is: ‘Conclusion Does Not Follow’.

Millionaire = A, lives in a city = B, has less than two cars = C, any living place = D.
According to the premises, (no A + B -> C), which equals (A + B -> ~C), and (B^Ergfort + ~C)^{*some but not all}.

The conclusion states (D + C) -> ~A.

B is a subgroup of D (a city is a kind of place). Rules that apply to B do not necessarily apply to D. This is a generalization.
At first, it may be tempting to think that if no one in D has two cars or more, then there are no

millionaires there. However, the first premise only discussed millionaires in cities. You know nothing about millionaires in general. Therefore, the conclusion does not follow.

Answer

The correct answer is: ‘Conclusion Does Not Follow’

According to the premises, (20 employees)*.
When a range is given as data, both limits must appear at least once (both must exist). So:
0 ≤ coffee cups ≤ 4; (employee + 0 cups)*; (employee + 4 cups)*.

The conclusion states ~*(5 cups a day)

The conclusion would follow if you knew every possibility in the range exists (that is, that at least one employee drinks 0 cups a day, at least one employee drinks 1 cup a day, and at least one employee drinks 2 cups a day, etc.), in which case the employees who drink 3 cups of coffee a day would drink 15 cups a week. But you don’t know that. All you know is that the limits of the range exist.

Correct Answer

The logic behind this answer is mathematical: the passage states that 65% of the pupils who were not entitled to a free school meal achieved five GCSE passes at a minimum of a C grade.

Since 65% is greater than 50%, we can conclude that they are the majority.

Answer

The correct answer is: ‘Conclusion Does Not Follow’.

The conclusion proposes a reason that is neither given explicitly in the text nor probable beyond a reasonable doubt. It provides an explanation that stems from our own personal perceptions.

Answer

The correct answer is: ‘Conclusion Does Not Follow’.

The logic behind this answer is mathematical: a 300% increase is, in fact, equal to an increase by a factor of four. If a lime costs $1.50 today, which is an increase of 300% in price compared to ten years ago, then ten years ago, it was worth $0.375.

Previous price X 4 = 1.5, so 1.5 ÷ 4 = previous price = 0.375.

When something increases by 100%, it is actually multiplied by 2, so you need to divide the current cost by 4 and not 3. When something increases by 200%, it is multiplied by 3. So, when something increases by 300%, it is multiplied by 4.

Answer

The correct answer is: ‘Conclusion Does Not Follow’.

Even though obesity rates have increased worldwide, we cannot conclude anything regarding advancement. Advancements usually refer to fields of technology and medicine. It is possible that there have been advancements in those fields, but obesity has increased because of poor nutrition and a decrease in active lifestyles. Therefore, the conclusion does not follow.

Correct Answer

This argument, although of great general importance, is not directly related to the question. The question specifically asked about preparation courses for gifted tests, and the arguments do not even mention them.

If, for example, the argument made the connection between preparation courses and job success itself, the argument would have been strong. Since it does not, it is weak.

Answer

The correct answer is: ‘Strong Argument’.

This argument is both relevant to the topic and important.

• It is important, as it refers to the benefit the company might (or might not) get from this policy.
• It is relevant, as it addresses the issue itself – the free time given to employees and its consequences.

Note that the trivial details provided ("...clean their homes, run errands, and meet with friends...") are a distractor intended to make the issue seem trivial – however, they do not change the relevance or importance of the given argument. 

Answer

The correct answer is: ‘Strong Argument’

Whether you agree with this argument or not, you must consider it true. As such, it is strong. It both relates to the question directly and raises an important claim that grades should reflect someone’s merits and not take into account factors such as ethnicity or socioeconomic background.

Answer

The correct answer is: ‘Strong Argument’

Here you have a reference to the ethical problems involved in data mining in which, unlike in the first question in this set, the ethical aspect is presented in relation to the main question - preventing national security threats. In other words, this argument is related to the question, and the consequence it described is important. For this reason, it is a strong argument.