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. Enumerative - Analogical - & Causal.
Inductive Argument
Margin of Error
Target Group
3 Forms of Inductive Argument
2. A comparison of two or more things alike in specific respects.
Inference to the best explanation
Analogy
Inductive Argument
Relevant Property
3. 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
causal argument
Inductive Argument
Representative Sample
Target Group
4. 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
Enumerative Argument
post hoc - ergo propter hoc
Inference to the best explanation
analogical induction
5. The variation between the values derived from a sample and the true values of the whole target group.
Margin of Error
Confidence Level
Sample
analogical induction
6. 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.
Method of Difference
Opinion polls
post hoc - ergo propter hoc
Causal claim
7. 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
Representative Sample
Target Group
Method of Difference
8. (or property in question) In enumerative induction - a property - or characteristic - that is of interest in the target group.
Target Group
Relevant Property
Method of Concomitant Variation
Sufficient Condition
9. 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.
3 Forms of Inductive Argument
Target Group
Random Sample
Inference to the best explanation
10. A condition for the occurrence of an event without which the event cannot occur.
Necessary Condition
Method of Difference
Biased Sample
hasty generalization
11. (or sample member) In enumerative induction - the observed members of the target group.
Sample
causal argument
Target Group
Enumerative Argument
12. A form of inductive reasoning in which we reason from premises about a state of affairs to an explanation for that state of affairs:
Representative Sample
Enumerative Argument
Inference to the best explanation
Biased Sample
13. (after that - therefore because of that). The fallacy of reasoning that just because B followed A - A must have caused B.
Causal claim
Random Sample
Method of Difference
post hoc - ergo propter hoc
14. A statement about the cause of things.
Causal claim
Method of Concomitant Variation
Random Sample
Analogy
15. A sample that does not properly represent the target group.
Biased Sample
Inductive Argument
post hoc - ergo propter hoc
Enumerative Argument
16. When two events are correlated--when one varies in close connection w/ the other--they are probably related.
post hoc - ergo propter hoc
Representative Sample
causal argument
Method of Concomitant Variation
17. (or target population) In enumerative induction - the whole collection of individuals under study.
Target Group
hasty generalization
Biased Sample
post hoc - ergo propter hoc
18. If two or more occurrences of a phenomenon have only one relevant factor in common - that factor must be the cause.
hasty generalization
Method of Difference
Method of Agreement
Representative Sample
19. Argument intended to give probable support for its conclusion.
Inductive Argument
Analogy
Target Group
Opinion polls
20. In enumerative induction - a sample that resembles the target group in all relevant ways.
Representative Sample
Necessary Condition
Causal claim
Method of Agreement
21. 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
causal argument
Method of Agreement
22. 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
Representative Sample
Biased Sample
analogical induction
causal argument
23. A condition for the occurrence of an event that guarantees that the event occurs.
Sufficient Condition
Necessary Condition
Opinion polls
Target Group
24. In statistical theory - the probability that the sample will accurately represent the target group within the margin of error.
Enumerative Argument
Analogy
Biased Sample
Confidence Level