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