PrepLattice is an independent test-preparation service and is not affiliated with or endorsed by GMAC, the organization that administers the GMAT. GMAT and GMAT Focus are trademarks of GMAC, used here only to name the exam this question is designed to prepare you for.
Every pastry that the Northgate Bakery prepares with its almond-paste filling earns a top score from the regional dessert judges. The lemon tart earned a top score from the regional dessert judges. Therefore, the lemon tart must have been prepared with the almond-paste filling.
Which of the following arguments uses reasoning most similar to the reasoning in the argument above?
Five fresh questions every day, your progress tracked, every miss explained. Free with an account.
Correct answer
B
This is a parallel reasoning question. Strip away the topic from each argument and describe only its logical skeleton, then find the choice whose skeleton matches the stem's.
The stem's skeleton is this: every item with feature A gets result B; this item got result B; therefore this item has feature A. In plain terms, the argument observes the result and works backward to claim the cause. This move is invalid, because a top score can come from any of several recipes, so a top score does not prove the almond-paste filling was used. A matching choice must (1) open with a universal rule (every or all, not most), (2) note that a specific item shows the result, and (3) conclude that the item therefore has the feature, reasoning backward from result to cause.
Choice (B) is the match. Every Bramford winner is released before December, which is a universal rule running from feature to result. The Caldwell mystery was released before December, so it shows the result. The argument concludes the Caldwell mystery is a Bramford winner, reasoning backward from result to feature. This is the same backward, result-to-cause move built on the same kind of universal rule, so (B) is correct.
Choice (A) reverses the direction. It confirms that the starting condition is met (Priya finished the program) and then draws the guaranteed result (she qualifies for a raise). That is valid reasoning running forward from cause to result, the opposite of the stem's backward move.
Choice (C) is the closest near miss. It reasons backward from result to cause just like the stem, which makes it tempting, but its opening rule says most cafes, not every cafe. The stem's rule is universal, so (C) is one quantifier weaker and the structures do not line up.
Choice (D) negates the opening condition (the garden is not watered daily) and predicts that the result fails. The stem never negates anything; it affirms a result and infers a cause. That is a different pattern.
Choice (E) shares a similar universal-rule surface, but it confirms the starting condition (the auditor approved every report before noon) and then states the guaranteed result (each report was filed today). Like (A), it runs forward from condition to result, while the stem runs backward.
The fastest reliable approach is to sort by validity first. The stem's argument is invalid, so eliminate the valid forward arguments, (A) and (E). Among the remaining invalid choices, keep only the one that both reads backward and uses a universal rule: (D) negates rather than reading backward, and (C) uses most rather than every, which leaves (B).
Pick the theme that suits how you work. You can change it anytime.