OFFICER LOGICAL REASONING EXAM
REVIEW GUIDE 2026 COMPLETE
PRACTICE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
●● A transit company's bus drivers are evaluated by supervisors riding
with each driver. Drivers complain that this affects their performance,
but because the supervisor's presence affects every driver's performance,
those drivers performing best with a supervisor aboard will likely also be
the best drivers under normal conditions.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument
depends?
A. There is no effective way of evaluating the bus drivers' performance
without having supervisors ride with them.
B. The supervisors are excellent judges of a bus drivers' performance.
C. For most bus drivers, the presence of a supervisor makes their
performance slightly worse than it otherwise would be.
D. The bus drivers are each affected roughly the same way and to the
same extent by the presence of the supervisor.
,E. The bus drivers themselves are able to deliver accurate assessments of
their driving performanc. Answer: NECESSARY ASSUMPTION
C is tempting. While this would suggest that bus drivers actually
perform better in normal conditions, the conclusion is not that bus
drivers will perform better than observed under supervision. Rather, the
conclusion states that the best drivers under supervisor are also the best
drivers under normal conditions. Additionally, it is not an assumption
that the argument depends upon.
D is correct. This assumption is necessary for the conclusion that the
best drivers under supervision are also the best drivers under normal
conditions.
●● M, despite his generally poor appetite, thoroughly enjoyed the three
meals he ate at the hotel, but, unfortunately, after each meal he became
ill. The first time he ate an extra large pizza with peppers. The second
time, he took full advantage of the all you can eat shrimp and peppers
special. The third time, he had two giant meatballs with peppers. Since
the only food all three meals had in common was peppers, M concluded
that it was solely due to peppers that he became ill.
M's reasoning is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. He draws his conclusions on the basis of too few meals that were
consumed at the hotel.
,B. He posits a causal relationship without ascertaining that the presumed
cause preceded the presumed effect.
C. He allows his desire to continue dining at the hotel to bias his
conclusion.
D. He fails to establish that everyone at the hotel also became ill after
eating peppers.
E.. Answer: FLAW
Trick; not a causation flaw
A. The argument does not do this. It does not extrapolate beyond the
three meals.
B. The argument does not do this. Becoming ill did not come before
eating the peppers.
E. Correct. It is given that M generally has a poor appetite.
●● A museum director, in order to finance expensive new acquisitions,
discretely sold some paintings by major artists. All of them were
paintings that the directly privately considered inferior. Critics roundly
condemned the sale, charging that the museum had lost first rate pieces,
thereby violating its duty as a trustee of art for future generations. A few
months after being sold by the museum, those paintings were resold, in
, an otherwise stagnant art market, at two or three tones the price paid to
the museum. Clearly, the prices settled the issue, since they demonstrate
the correctness of the critics' evaluation.
The reasoning in the argument is vulnerable to the criticism that the
argument does which of the following?
A. It concludes that a certain opinion is correct on the grounds that it
help by more people than hold the opposing view.
B. It rejects the judgement of experts...
C. It rejects a proven means of. Answer: FLAW
Trick; causation flaw, not a fact v opinion flaw
Premise:
Deemed inferior —> sold cheaper
Deemed superior —> sold at a more expensive price
Conclusion:
Sold at more expensive price —> proof that deemed superior
REVIEW GUIDE 2026 COMPLETE
PRACTICE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
●● A transit company's bus drivers are evaluated by supervisors riding
with each driver. Drivers complain that this affects their performance,
but because the supervisor's presence affects every driver's performance,
those drivers performing best with a supervisor aboard will likely also be
the best drivers under normal conditions.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument
depends?
A. There is no effective way of evaluating the bus drivers' performance
without having supervisors ride with them.
B. The supervisors are excellent judges of a bus drivers' performance.
C. For most bus drivers, the presence of a supervisor makes their
performance slightly worse than it otherwise would be.
D. The bus drivers are each affected roughly the same way and to the
same extent by the presence of the supervisor.
,E. The bus drivers themselves are able to deliver accurate assessments of
their driving performanc. Answer: NECESSARY ASSUMPTION
C is tempting. While this would suggest that bus drivers actually
perform better in normal conditions, the conclusion is not that bus
drivers will perform better than observed under supervision. Rather, the
conclusion states that the best drivers under supervisor are also the best
drivers under normal conditions. Additionally, it is not an assumption
that the argument depends upon.
D is correct. This assumption is necessary for the conclusion that the
best drivers under supervision are also the best drivers under normal
conditions.
●● M, despite his generally poor appetite, thoroughly enjoyed the three
meals he ate at the hotel, but, unfortunately, after each meal he became
ill. The first time he ate an extra large pizza with peppers. The second
time, he took full advantage of the all you can eat shrimp and peppers
special. The third time, he had two giant meatballs with peppers. Since
the only food all three meals had in common was peppers, M concluded
that it was solely due to peppers that he became ill.
M's reasoning is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?
A. He draws his conclusions on the basis of too few meals that were
consumed at the hotel.
,B. He posits a causal relationship without ascertaining that the presumed
cause preceded the presumed effect.
C. He allows his desire to continue dining at the hotel to bias his
conclusion.
D. He fails to establish that everyone at the hotel also became ill after
eating peppers.
E.. Answer: FLAW
Trick; not a causation flaw
A. The argument does not do this. It does not extrapolate beyond the
three meals.
B. The argument does not do this. Becoming ill did not come before
eating the peppers.
E. Correct. It is given that M generally has a poor appetite.
●● A museum director, in order to finance expensive new acquisitions,
discretely sold some paintings by major artists. All of them were
paintings that the directly privately considered inferior. Critics roundly
condemned the sale, charging that the museum had lost first rate pieces,
thereby violating its duty as a trustee of art for future generations. A few
months after being sold by the museum, those paintings were resold, in
, an otherwise stagnant art market, at two or three tones the price paid to
the museum. Clearly, the prices settled the issue, since they demonstrate
the correctness of the critics' evaluation.
The reasoning in the argument is vulnerable to the criticism that the
argument does which of the following?
A. It concludes that a certain opinion is correct on the grounds that it
help by more people than hold the opposing view.
B. It rejects the judgement of experts...
C. It rejects a proven means of. Answer: FLAW
Trick; causation flaw, not a fact v opinion flaw
Premise:
Deemed inferior —> sold cheaper
Deemed superior —> sold at a more expensive price
Conclusion:
Sold at more expensive price —> proof that deemed superior
