SUBJECTS
|
BROWSE
|
CAREER CENTER
|
POPULAR
|
JOIN
|
LOGIN
Business Skills
|
Soft Skills
|
Basic Literacy
|
Certifications
About
|
Help
|
Privacy
|
Terms
|
Email
Search
Test your basic knowledge |
Inductive Reasoning
Start Test
Study First
Subject
:
logic-and-reasoning
Instructions:
Answer 24 questions in 15 minutes.
If you are not ready to take this test, you can
study here
.
Match each statement with the correct term.
Don't refresh. All questions and answers are randomly picked and ordered every time you load a test.
This is a study tool. The 3 wrong answers for each question are randomly chosen from answers to other questions. So, you might find at times the answers obvious, but you will see it re-enforces your understanding as you take the test each time.
1. Reason that because two or more things are similar in several respects - they must be similar in some further respect. We evaluate arguments by analogy according to several criteria: (1) the number of relevant similarities between things being compar
Necessary Condition
analogical induction
Sufficient Condition
Inference to the best explanation
2. A condition for the occurrence of an event without which the event cannot occur.
Method of Agreement
Necessary Condition
Enumerative Argument
Target Group
3. If two or more occurrences of a phenomenon have only one relevant factor in common - that factor must be the cause.
Causal claim
Method of Agreement
Method of Difference
Margin of Error
4. A sample that is selected randomly from a target group in such a way as to ensure that the sample is representative. In a simple random selection - every member of the target group has an equal chance of being selected for the sample.
Relevant Property
Target Group
Random Sample
analogical induction
5. An enumerative induction can fail to be strong by having a sample that's too small or not representative. When we draw a conclusion about a target group based on an inadequate sample size
hasty generalization
Sufficient Condition
Confidence Level
Enumerative Argument
6. (after that - therefore because of that). The fallacy of reasoning that just because B followed A - A must have caused B.
causal argument
Inductive Argument
Biased Sample
post hoc - ergo propter hoc
7. When two events are correlated--when one varies in close connection w/ the other--they are probably related.
Method of Concomitant Variation
Target Group
3 Forms of Inductive Argument
Confidence Level
8. A comparison of two or more things alike in specific respects.
Sample
Analogy
Confidence Level
Necessary Condition
9. Enumerative inductive arguments - or the basis of enumerative inductive arguments - and must be judged by the same general criteria used to judge any other enumerative induction.
Inductive Argument
Opinion polls
Confidence Level
Analogy
10. Enumerative - Analogical - & Causal.
Causal claim
Method of Concomitant Variation
Representative Sample
3 Forms of Inductive Argument
11. The relevant factor present when a phenomenon occurs - and absent when the phenomenon does not occur - must be the cause.
Method of Difference
3 Forms of Inductive Argument
Sufficient Condition
causal argument
12. A condition for the occurrence of an event that guarantees that the event occurs.
Sample
Sufficient Condition
causal argument
Necessary Condition
13. In enumerative induction - a sample that resembles the target group in all relevant ways.
Inductive Argument
Method of Difference
Relevant Property
Representative Sample
14. Inductive argument whose conclusion contains a causal claim. There are several inductive patterns of reasoning used to assess causal connections. These include the Method of Agreement - the Method of Difference - the Method of Agreement and Differenc
Margin of Error
Causal claim
analogical induction
causal argument
15. In statistical theory - the probability that the sample will accurately represent the target group within the margin of error.
3 Forms of Inductive Argument
Random Sample
hasty generalization
Confidence Level
16. The variation between the values derived from a sample and the true values of the whole target group.
Margin of Error
Sufficient Condition
Method of Concomitant Variation
hasty generalization
17. (or sample member) In enumerative induction - the observed members of the target group.
Sample
Sufficient Condition
Biased Sample
Opinion polls
18. (or target population) In enumerative induction - the whole collection of individuals under study.
3 Forms of Inductive Argument
Target Group
Method of Agreement
Relevant Property
19. A form of inductive reasoning in which we reason from premises about a state of affairs to an explanation for that state of affairs:
Inference to the best explanation
Necessary Condition
analogical induction
Random Sample
20. Argue from premises about some members of a group to a generalization about the entire group. The entire group is called the target group; the observed members of the group - the sample; and the group characteristics we're interested in - the relevan
Causal claim
Method of Concomitant Variation
Enumerative Argument
Confidence Level
21. (or property in question) In enumerative induction - a property - or characteristic - that is of interest in the target group.
Method of Difference
post hoc - ergo propter hoc
hasty generalization
Relevant Property
22. A sample that does not properly represent the target group.
3 Forms of Inductive Argument
Analogy
causal argument
Biased Sample
23. A statement about the cause of things.
Sample
Method of Agreement
Causal claim
Method of Difference
24. Argument intended to give probable support for its conclusion.
Inductive Argument
hasty generalization
Inference to the best explanation
Sufficient Condition