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