ReasoningAbility.com

Assumption Negation Test: Worksheet 6 - Intermediate-Advanced Practice Assumption Negation Test INTERMEDIATE ADVANCED

Ready to master Assumption Negation Test? This timed practice ⚡ worksheet (6/10) presents 20 intermediate-advanced-level challenges. Focus area: speed building. Learn to solve assumption negation test tricks, handle assumption negation test shortcut methods, and perfect assumption negation test bank exam questions with our step-by-step solutions.

📝 Worksheet 6 of 10 • 20 questions • ⏱️ Estimated time: 20 minutes • 🎯 Intermediate Advanced level

What you'll learn in this worksheet:
Your progress through Assumption Negation Test
Worksheet 6 of 10 (55% complete)

Question 1

Argument: This new medicine should be approved because clinical trials show it's effective for 85% of patients. Consider the assumption: 'Side effects are acceptable' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — Unacceptable side effects would block approval regardless of efficacy

Negation test: If 'Side effects are NOT acceptable' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 2

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'The light will be properly maintained' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — A malfunctioning light could increase accidents

Negation test: If 'The light will NOT be properly maintained' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 3

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'Drivers will obey the traffic light' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If drivers ignore it, the light won't reduce accidents

Negation test: If 'Drivers will NOT obey the traffic light' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 4

Argument: This new medicine should be approved because clinical trials show it's effective for 85% of patients. Consider the assumption: '85% effectiveness is clinically meaningful' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If the effect size is trivial, approval isn't justified

Negation test: If '85% effectiveness is NOT clinically meaningful' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 5

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'Drivers will obey the traffic light' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If drivers ignore it, the light won't reduce accidents

Negation test: If 'Drivers will NOT obey the traffic light' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 6

Argument: We should hire Maria as our lead developer because she has 10 years of experience in our industry. Consider the assumption: 'Industry experience is relevant to job performance' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If experience isn't relevant, then her 10 years don't justify hiring her

Negation test: If 'Industry experience is NOT relevant to job performance' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 7

Argument: We should hire Maria as our lead developer because she has 10 years of experience in our industry. Consider the assumption: 'Industry experience is relevant to job performance' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If experience isn't relevant, then her 10 years don't justify hiring her

Negation test: If 'Industry experience is NOT relevant to job performance' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 8

Argument: This new medicine should be approved because clinical trials show it's effective for 85% of patients. Consider the assumption: '85% effectiveness is clinically meaningful' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If the effect size is trivial, approval isn't justified

Negation test: If '85% effectiveness is NOT clinically meaningful' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 9

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'The light will be properly maintained' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — A malfunctioning light could increase accidents

Negation test: If 'The light will NOT be properly maintained' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 10

Argument: This new medicine should be approved because clinical trials show it's effective for 85% of patients. Consider the assumption: 'Side effects are acceptable' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — Unacceptable side effects would block approval regardless of efficacy

Negation test: If 'Side effects are NOT acceptable' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 11

Argument: We should hire Maria as our lead developer because she has 10 years of experience in our industry. Consider the assumption: 'Maria wants the position' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
No — Even if she doesn't want it, we could still argue we should hire her (though she'd decline)

Negation test: If 'Maria does NOT want the position' then the argument 'still could hold'.

Question 12

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'Drivers will obey the traffic light' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If drivers ignore it, the light won't reduce accidents

Negation test: If 'Drivers will NOT obey the traffic light' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 13

Argument: We should hire Maria as our lead developer because she has 10 years of experience in our industry. Consider the assumption: 'Industry experience is relevant to job performance' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If experience isn't relevant, then her 10 years don't justify hiring her

Negation test: If 'Industry experience is NOT relevant to job performance' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 14

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'The intersection currently has accidents' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
No — Could still prevent future accidents even if none currently

Negation test: If 'The intersection has NO accidents currently' then the argument 'still could hold'.

Question 15

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'The light will be properly maintained' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — A malfunctioning light could increase accidents

Negation test: If 'The light will NOT be properly maintained' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 16

Argument: We should hire Maria as our lead developer because she has 10 years of experience in our industry. Consider the assumption: 'Industry experience is relevant to job performance' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — If experience isn't relevant, then her 10 years don't justify hiring her

Negation test: If 'Industry experience is NOT relevant to job performance' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 17

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'No other intersection changes are needed' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
No — The light could still reduce accidents even if other changes help too

Negation test: If 'Other intersection changes ARE needed' then the argument 'still could hold'.

Question 18

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'The light will be properly maintained' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
Yes — A malfunctioning light could increase accidents

Negation test: If 'The light will NOT be properly maintained' then the argument 'fails'.

Question 19

Argument: The new traffic light at Main Street will reduce accidents because it will control the previously dangerous intersection. Consider the assumption: 'No other intersection changes are needed' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
No — The light could still reduce accidents even if other changes help too

Negation test: If 'Other intersection changes ARE needed' then the argument 'still could hold'.

Question 20

Argument: We should hire Maria as our lead developer because she has 10 years of experience in our industry. Consider the assumption: 'Maria wants the position' If we negate this assumption (assume the opposite), does it break the argument?
No — Even if she doesn't want it, we could still argue we should hire her (though she'd decline)

Negation test: If 'Maria does NOT want the position' then the argument 'still could hold'.
Previous Worksheet Next Worksheet