The challenge
Boldfaced questions appear in the Critical Reasoning section of GMAT Verbal. If you are appearing for the GMAT Focus Edition, you can almost certainly expect at least 1 Bolfaced question on the test. Such questions can be a bit daunting for even those who are otherwise scoring a 90+%ile in GMAT Verbal. This is because while there are plenty of strategies for other question types tested on the GMAT Verbal Reasoning section, there are few tips and strategies for Boldfaced questions. Further, it would appear that one would need to read the entire passage and understand the meaning of complicated legal terminology (“consideration”, “objection”, “judgement”, “premise”, “assertion” etc. – wait, was this statement a premise or claim??) to arrive at the correct answer.
The 3-pronged strategy
The above process can appear pretty time-consuming, and you may end up spending more than 3-4 mins to solve a GMAT Boldfaced question. This, in turn, can have a cascading effect on the timing/accuracy of the remaining questions. A quick reminder, you are allowed roughly 1min 48s for a GMAT Verbal question. However, it is important to recognize that every question type on GMAT Critical Reasoning tests your ability to think logically rather than your capability of comprehending “legalese” :). In this post, I will share a simple 3-pronged strategy for solving a Critical Reasoning boldfaced question easily on the GMAT, and in under 1.5 minutes, based on critical thinking and the process of elimination.
Sample Question
Firstly, let us see what a boldfaced question or option would look like on the GMAT Verbal section (source GMAT OG).
Chaco Canyon, a settlement of the ancient Anasazi culture in North America, had massive buildings. It must have been a major Anasazi center. Analysis of wood samples shows that some of the timber for the buildings came from Chuska and San Mateo Mountains, 50 miles from Chaco Canyon. Only a major cultural center would have the organizational power to import timber from 50 miles away.
In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first is premise used to support the argument’s main conclusion; the second is the argument’s main conclusion.
(B) The first is the argument’s main conclusion; the second is a premise used to support that conclusion.
(C) The first is one of the two premises used to support the argument’s main conclusion; the second is the other of those two premises.
(D) The first is premise used to support the argument’s main conclusion; the second is a premise used to support another conclusion drawn in the argument.
(E) The first is inferred from another statement in the argument; the second is inferred from the first.
Boldfaced Question Explanation and the 3-pronged process
As we can see, generally 2 sentences will be in the bolded portion, and we have to identify the relationship between these sentences. The first step in approaching a GMAT boldfaced question is to design a map of the 2 sentences, and then start eliminating the options based on your map. (A quick pro-tip before we proceed – in a CR Boldfaced option, “argument” refers to the “author writing the argument”). There are 3 key logical steps in the mapping process.
Step 1:
Identify the logical roles of Statements 1 and 2. Check whether Statement 1 and Statement 2 – i.e., the 2 sentences in the boldfaced portion – are a fact or an opinion (just focus on the categorization based on this dichotomy). If a statement is a piece of data such as a number, report, study, or general truth, we need to categorize it as a “fact“. Similarly, if the statement is a prediction/recommendation/suggestion, it would be categorized as “opinion” (check for keywords such as may, must, could, should, will, etc.). This is the end of Step 1 – simple, right? 🙂
Step 2:
Identify which sentence – this does NOT necessarily have to be in the boldfaced portion – is the main conclusion of the passage. A way to identify the main conclusion sentence is to ask the question – “Which sentence in the passage captures the main reason that the author is writing the passage?” (this is similar to the line of reasoning used for a primary purpose question). END of STEP 2.
Step 3 (last step):
Identify the relationship – support/refute – between Statement 2/1 and the main conclusion (identified in Step 2). To complete this step quickly, identify the structure of the 2 sentences – i.e., look for connectors. For example, if the structure of the 2 sentences is something along the lines of “Statement 2. However, main conclusion…“, quite clearly the relationship between Statement 2 and the main conclusion is one of contradiction. END of STEP 3.
And…WE ARE DONE! Now, let us form the map for the above Critical Reasoning question.
Creating our Map for our Boldfaced Question
Statement 1 – “It must have been a major Anasazi center”. This, clearly (notice the word “must”), is an opinion
Statement 2 – “Only a major cultural center would have the organizational power to import timber from 50 miles away.” This again (notice the word “would”), is an opinion of the author
In this passage, there are only 2 sentences (2nd and 4th) which are opinions. The 1st and 3rd sentences provide factual information. A way to identify the main conclusion – in a GMAT CR or RC passage — is to ask the following questions:
“Why has the author written the following passage?”, or,
“What does the author want to prove through this passage to a layperson?”
Is he writing the passage to argue that “Only a major cultural center would have the organizational power to import timber from 50 miles away” or is he writing the passage to prove that “It (Chaco Canyon) must have been a major Anasazi center”? Since GMAT Verbal (and, more broadly, the GMAT as a whole) is a standardized exam, the answer to these questions from the perspective of a layperson will help you identify the main conclusion correctly.
If we think about it logically, the first statement is something that would be well-known (could be found online or in a book). It does not need to be explained via a whole new Critical Reasoning passage – also note that there is not much contention (or debate) around the notion that only a major cultural center would have the organizational power to import timber from 50 miles away (seems reasonably logical). Hence, the PRIMARY PURPOSE of this passage (the reason why the author took the pain to write a brand new GMAT passage) must be to contend that Chaco Canyon must have been a major Anasazi center. Hence our first boldfaced statement is also the main conclusion.
Identify the Relationship – support/refute – between statement 2 and the main conclusion. Quite clearly, there is no contrast marker (such as “However”, “Although”, “But”, etc.) between Statement 2 and the main conclusion. So, the 2 statements must be supporting each other. This is the most effective way to complete Step 3.
Now we are done with our 3 steps, phew! Let us refine our map one final time for the 2 boldfaced statements:
Statement 1: Main conclusion
Statement 2: Opinion supporting/being supported by the main conclusion.
Elimination
Now, let us apply our favorite process of elimination to the options. Options A, C, and D say that “The first is a premise that supports the argument’s main conclusion”. However, we just identified that Statement 1 is, in fact, the main conclusion. Therefore, if a statement is the main conclusion, and an option says anything but [e.g., supporting/refuting the main conclusion] (and vice-versa), we can eliminate that option. This eliminates A, C, and D.
If we quickly check our map, we see that option B is almost a perfect match to the relationship between the 2 sentences (as per our map). On the exam day, at this stage, you should select Option B and move on. For completeness, we can also eliminate Option E. The second statement is standalone and not inferred from any other sentence in the passage. Hence, this leaves Option B as the best answer. Done.
Note that I have not even touched upon the word “premise” as a decision point to eliminate any option(s). And this, precisely, is the method to acing GMAT Boldfaced Critical Reasoning questions in a timed environment. Avoid focusing on the legal jargon, and instead focus on the logical relationship, and everything becomes easy-peasy!
Apply this strategy to other official boldfaced questions, and see whether you can solve a boldfaced question within the time limit. Please feel free to leave any comments in case of queries.
Happy prepping!
Assumption questions on GMAT – Negation strategy(Opens in a new browser tab)