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