| Subcribe via RSS

FireUp Logo

Sample Verbal Questions

August 20th, 2011 Posted in Uncategorized

Sample Verbal Questions- Directions for next 5 sample verbal questions: For each of the verbal questions given below select the best option from the answers given.

1. In 1988, 50 people with emotional disturbances underwent hypnosis to be cured of their mood swings. A follow up survey in 1993 revealed that five had fairly stable emotional conditions at the time of the survey. These five subjects can therefore serve as models of the types of people for whom hypnosis is likely to be successful. Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the suitability of those five subjects as models in the sense described?
(A) The five subjects have very different personalities and backgrounds.
(B) Since 1988, the five subjects have experienced dramatic mood swings interspersed with periods of relative stability.
(C) Those people who were still suffering from unstable emotional conditions at the time of the 1993 survey had shown no improvement since 1988.
(D) Many psychologists are less concerned about a patient’s mood swings than about the patient’s willingness to express his or her problems and fears.
(E) The emotional condition of most of the 45 subjects who were still unstable at the time of the 1993 survey had actually worsened since 1988.

2. The cause of the peculiar columnar growth pattern displayed by junipers growing near burning underground veins of lignite coal has never been convincingly explained. Until recently, the accepted theory posited that the abundance of carbon monoxide in the local atmosphere caused the columnar growth. However, a new theory holds that the cause is the persistent heat present near these underground fires which, while not intense enough to inflame the trees, can nonetheless change their normal growth pattern.
The existence of which of the following would provide the strongest support for the new theory?
(A) A columnar juniper growing in an atmosphere of intense heat and an absence of carbon monoxide
(B) A normal juniper growing in an atmosphere of intense heat and an absence of carbon monoxide
(C) A columnar juniper growing in an atmosphere of normal heat and a high concentration of carbon monoxide
(D) A normal juniper growing in an atmosphere of intense heat and a high concentration of carbon monoxide
(E) A columnar juniper growing in an atmosphere of intense heat and a high concentration of carbon monoxide

3. Truck driver: The gasoline tax is too high and it must be lowered. It has been raised every year for the last five years, while other sales taxes have not. If the government persists in unfairly penalizing truck drivers, our increased operating costs will either hurt consumers or put us out of business.
State official: But your gasoline tax dollars maintain and improve the very roads you depend on. Without those additional revenues, road conditions would deteriorate, costing you and consumers much more in maintenance and repairs. If the statements made above are true, the best characterization of the logical relationship between the two arguments is that the state official’s response
(A) points out that the truck driver’s proposal will actually worsen the problem it is intended to solve
(B) is circular, assuming the truth of its conclusion in order to justify its conclusion
(C) points out that the truck driver is selfish because more people are aided by the gasoline tax than are penalized
(D) is merely an attempt to excuse the government’s policies without providing any justification for those policies
(E) points to an inherent contradiction between the cause the truck driver cites and the effects the truck driver thinks will follow from the cause

4. The cost of transatlantic airfare has nearly doubled over the past five years, yet airlines are doing a booming business. Clearly, people today have more money to spend on vacations than they did five years ago. All of the following, if true, would weaken the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) Most people buying transatlantic tickets today use them for business trips, so airfare is refunded by their companies.
(B) There are fewer airlines in existence today than five years ago.
(C) People are taking shorter vacations and staying in cheaper hotels than they used to.
(D) Crossing the Atlantic by ship requires more time than most people can afford.
(E) Domestic airline flights have seen a steady increase in passengers.

5. Plant Y thrives in environments of great sunlight and very little moisture. Desert X is an environment with constant, powerful sunlight, and almost no moisture. Although Plant Y thrives in the areas surrounding Desert X, it does not exist naturally in the desert, nor does it survive long when introduced there. Which of the following, if true, would be most useful in explaining the apparent discrepancy above? (4)
(A) Desert X’s climate is far too harsh for the animals that normally feed on Plant Y.
(B) For one week in the fall, Desert X gets consistent rainfall.
(C) The environment around Desert X is ideally suited to the needs of Plant Y.
(D) Due to the lack of sufficient moisture, Desert X can support very little plant life.
(E) Plant Y cannot survive in temperatures as high as those normally found in Desert X.

Related posts:

  1. Verbal Ability Questions With Answers
  2. CAT Verbal Sample Questions
  3. CAT Free Sample Verbal Questions

One Response to “Sample Verbal Questions”

  1. admin Says:

    1. Explanation: The Conclusion: These five people can serve as models for the type of person who can be helped by hypnosis. The Evidence: A study showed that these five previously disturbed hypnosis subjects had stable emotional conditions. The survey only found that at the time of the study the five seemed to be doing OK. Remember, these people were originally suffering from mood swings; maybe the study just caught them on a good day. If that’s the case—if since 1988 these people have been experiencing dramatic mood swings and occasional periods of health—then hypnosis hasn’t really helped them and they’re not good models. The author presented the people as models of different types of people who can be helped, not as a single model of a single personality type, so they needn’t be similar (A). It doesn’t matter that the other 45 people who underwent hypnosis didn’t get better (C); the argument is based on and concerns only the five who were stable. (E) fails to weaken the argument for the same reason. The concern of many psychologists (D) is well outside the scope. We need a statement that speaks about hypnosis and these five subjects.

    2. Explanation: The New Theory’s Conclusion: Heat (from the burning coal) causes columnar growth in junipers near burning underground coal veins. The New Theory’s Evidence: None really, except the correlation of columnar growth with these areas with underground fires. The Old Theory’s Conclusion: The abundance of carbon monoxide causes columnar growth.
    The Old Theory’s Evidence: None really, except the correlation of columnar growth with these areas with high carbon monoxide. When you scan the choices, you see that each presents a case of the cause with or without the effect or the effect with or without the cause. Since the two theories are in opposition, weakening the old theory is a way of strengthening the new one. Bearing in mind from the lesson the key issues in a causal argument, we recognize that a case of columnar growth where the cause claimed by the new theory (heat) is present, but the cause claimed by the old theory (carbon monoxide) is absent strengthens the new theory at the expense of the old. A case (B) where we get the new theory’s alleged cause (intense heat), without the alleged effect (columnar junipers) is of no help at all. A columnar juniper in an atmosphere with high carbon monoxide but no extra heat (C) strengthens the old theory. A case with both alleged causes without the expected effect (D) weakens both theories. Like wise columnar growth in the presence of both causes (E) does nothing to promote one theory over the other.

    3. Explanation: The Truck Driver’s Conclusion: The gas tax must be lowered. The Truck Driver’s Evidence: Increased costs will either put the truckers out of business or will hurt consumers.
    The Official’s Conclusion: The tax must remain.
    The Official’s Evidence: Highways will fall into disrepair without tax revenues, costing truckers and consumers even more.
    The official wants the trucker to realize that cutting gas taxes won’t help, but will likely raise costs for both industry and consumers. So she’s arguing that the trucker’s proposal, if carried out, will actually make matters worse. A circular argument (B) is more or less a restatement of the conclusion—that’s not what’s happening here. The official doesn’t accuse the trucker of selfishness (C); moreover, the trucker also warns of the harm done to consumers by the gas tax. The official does provide justification of the tax policy (D): the revenue pays for road upkeep. There’s no inherent contradiction between high taxes and the destruction of the trucking industry (E); nor does the official claim there is.

    4. The Conclusion: People have more money to spend on their vacations.
    The Evidence: Airlines are doing fine even though they’re charging high fares to cross the Atlantic.
    The idea that domestic flights are also booming doesn’t sever the connection between booming business and vacation money—it shows more booming business.
    The fact that most of the flights presented as evidence aren’t bought by vacationers (A) breaks the connection between booming business and vacation money. Airlines can do a booming business even if business as a whole is down, as long as (B) there are fewer airlines. If people are skimping elsewhere (C), then even if they’re paying a lot for airfare, they needn’t have more vacation money. And if in many cases people have no choice but to fly (D), they must pay the higher fares no matter how little money they have.

    5. The Discrepancy: We’re led to expect that Plant Y would thrive in Desert X. The plant likes lots of sunlight and little moisture, which is just what the desert has. So why doesn’t this plant thrive in this desert? That Desert X has high temperatures and that Plant Y can’t live in such high temperatures gives us additional evidence—it’s a perfectly fine explanation of why Plant Y wouldn’t thrive in Desert X. And by picking up on the fact that Y is a desert (which is often very hot places), this explanation works from the information given, as good GMAT explanations do. The absence of a predator (A), far from decreasing the likelihood of a plant’s survival, seems more likely to increase it. We have no reason to suspect (B) that one week of rainfall per year is too much for Plant Y
    to withstand. The fact that it can easily grow elsewhere (C) is irrelevant to the question of why it doesn’t grow in Desert X. And the information about Desert X provided in (D) doesn’t help us, since we’re not concerned with plant life in general, but only with Plant Y.

Leave a Reply