Analytical Writing Argument Task Practice Quiz Quiz

Strengthen your analytical writing skills with this argument task quiz, designed to help you identify logical flaws, assess evidence, and craft effective critiques. Ideal for test-takers and learners aiming to master the structure of argument analysis.

1. Identifying Assumptions in an Argument

   In the following scenario, what is the main weakness? 'Company A reported increased sales after changing its product packaging, so the packaging must have caused the increase.'

   1. The argument assumes no other factors influenced sales.
   2. The argument evaluates customer demographics.
   3. The argument gives detailed sales data.
   4. The argument directly surveys other companies.

   Explanation: The main flaw is that the argument assumes only the packaging caused the sales increase, ignoring other possible influences like advertising or seasonality. Referencing customer demographics is irrelevant to the stated weakness, detailed sales data would support the claim but is not mentioned, and surveying other companies does not address the assumption about causality. Only the correct answer identifies the central unstated assumption.

2. Distinguishing Evidence Strength

   Why is the following evidence weak? 'Most people in the survey remembered seeing the advertisement at least once.'

   1. It shows recall but not purchasing behavior.
   2. It explains the method of advertisement.
   3. It uses a very large sample size.
   4. It is a report from the advertising agency.

   Explanation: Noting that people remember an ad only indicates awareness, not that it led to any action such as buying a product, which weakens its persuasiveness. The fact that it's from an advertising agency is irrelevant here, as the argument's main flaw is about the kind of evidence provided. A large sample size generally strengthens, not weakens, evidence, while the method of advertisement isn't the focus of this weakness.

3. Evaluating Causal Claims

   Which revision best strengthens this causal claim? 'After installing new lighting, crime rates in the park decreased.'

   1. Interviewing visitors about their experiences.
   2. Describing the park’s location.
   3. Comparing crime rates in similar parks without new lighting.
   4. Listing types of crimes before installation.

   Explanation: Comparing rates with similar parks that did not install lighting helps control for external factors and supports the cause-and-effect relationship. Interviewing visitors is anecdotal and indirect, listing crimes is descriptive not comparative, and describing location does not establish causality. Only comparing with a control group strengthens the causal inference.

4. Recognizing Overgeneralizations

   Which of these statements is an overgeneralization? 'Students who study late at night perform better on exams, so all students should stay up late when preparing.'

   1. It compares studying at different times.
   2. It only discusses late-night study sessions.
   3. It assumes a strategy works equally for all students.
   4. It mentions exam performance statistics.

   Explanation: The statement incorrectly presumes that a method found effective for some applies universally, which is a classic overgeneralization. Focusing only on late-night study does not capture the overgeneral claim, mentioning statistics or comparing study times would add nuance but do not highlight the logical flaw. The key issue is the assumption about all students.

5. Analyzing Ambiguous Language

   What is problematic about this argument? 'Improving employee satisfaction boosts productivity, based on a recent improvement in company performance.'

   1. The term 'improvement in company performance' is vague.
   2. The argument cites multiple companies.
   3. The number of employees is not provided.
   4. The study period is exceptionally long.

   Explanation: The phrase 'improvement in company performance' lacks specificity, making it unclear what aspects were improved, which weakens the argument. Not knowing the number of employees is a minor issue and does not directly undermine the main claim. Citing multiple companies is not mentioned, and a long study period could be a strength in some contexts. The vagueness in language is the central problem.