{"id":13512,"date":"2026-09-23T15:20:02","date_gmt":"2026-09-23T15:20:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/grockit.com\/blog\/gmat\/?p=1524"},"modified":"2026-09-23T20:21:37","modified_gmt":"2026-09-23T20:21:37","slug":"inferences-on-the-gmat","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/gmat\/inferences-on-the-gmat\/","title":{"rendered":"GMAT Verbal: Inferences"},"content":{"rendered":"

You\u2019re having lunch with your friend Jane, and you suggest getting hot fudge sundaes for dessert; Jane tells you that she doesn\u2019t eat hot fudge sundaes. In real life, you could draw several valid inferences from this: she\u2019s lactose intolerant, she has sensitive teeth and so can\u2019t eat frozen desserts, she\u2019s on a diet and trying to avoid sweets, or maybe she just doesn\u2019t like ice cream or hot fudge.\u00a0In real life,<\/em> those would all be acceptable inferences, because the real-world definition of infer is to do any of the following:<\/p>\n

1. to derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence: e.g., They inferred his anger from his heated denial.<\/em>
\n2. (of facts, circumstances, statements, etc.) to indicate or involve as a conclusion; lead to.
\n3. to guess; speculate; surmise.
\n4. to hint; imply; suggest.<\/p>\n

\u201cInfer\u201d is, as you can see, a word with fairly flexible meaning. We most often use it in day-to-day life to mean \u201cmake an educated guess.\u201d If your friend Jane says she doesn\u2019t eat hot fudge sundaes, you apply your existing knowledge about the possible reasons someone could have for not enjoying the hot fudge and ice cream deliciousness, and you make an educated guess as to what her reasons could be.<\/p>\n

Inference question types are pretty unique. Unlike Assumption, Evaluate, Strengthen, Weaken, and Role of Bold, Inference questions are not based on arguments. And unlike Assumption, Evaluate, Strengthen, Weaken, and Explain Discrepancy, Inference questions are not usually about presenting your brain with some form of cognitive dissonance.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/span><\/div>\n

GMAT Verbal Inference Questions<\/h2>\n

On the GMAT, however, \u201cinference\u201d has a different meaning. Think of inferring as the process of deriving the strict logical consequences of assumed premises.<\/p>\n

On the GMAT, therefore, if you are told that Jane doesn\u2019t eat hot fudge sundaes, you can derive two logical consequences from that premise:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. If Jane is eating, has eaten, or will eat something, it isn\u2019t a hot fudge sundae, and<\/li>\n
  2. If someone is eating, has eaten, or will eat a hot fudge sundae, that person is not Jane.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The correct answer to an inference question on the GMAT will follow directly from the evidence provided; it is NOT merely an educated guess but is instead the logical consequence of the assumed premises.<\/p>\n

    Notice that just based on six words\u2014\u201cJane doesn\u2019t eat hot fudge sundaes\u201d\u2014we can draw two possible inferences. Now think of how many words you might see in the average GMAT question<\/a>, and you\u2019ll understand that inference questions, unlike other types of questions, don\u2019t lend themselves well to prediction. Trying to guess the correct inference being drawn from several sentences worth of statements is generally a waste of time.<\/p>\n

    Your best bet in approaching GMAT questions<\/a> that ask for inferences is to use the process of elimination. Eliminate answers that are just \u201ceducated guesses,\u201d answers that aren\u2019t necessarily true, answers that are too extreme, and of course, anything irrelevant. Your answer will be the one choice that follows strictly from the statements in the question.<\/p>\n

    <\/span><\/span><\/div>\n

    How to Learn GMAT Critical Reasoning<\/h2>\n

    In addition to learning the patterns surrounding analyzing Plans, Predictions, and Causal Explanations, we should also be learning a little index card\u2019s worth of technique for each of these seven main question types.<\/p>\n

    For each question type, we\u2019re trying to memorize the following:<\/p>\n

      \n
    • What keywords in the question stem tell me it\u2019s this type of question?<\/li>\n
    • What am I reading for in the paragraph?<\/li>\n
    • How, and to what extent, should I pre-phrase a potential correct answer?<\/li>\n
    • Are there any tendencies relating to the paragraph or the answer choices?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      So let\u2019s make sure everyone has a great index card for Inference questions.<\/p>\n

      What Keywords in the Question Stem Tell Me It\u2019s an Inference Question?<\/h4>\n

      Here are a few examples of Inference question stem wording:<\/p>\n

      \u2013 If the statements above are true, which of the following must be true?<\/i>
      \n<\/i>\u2013 If the information above is correct, which of the following is most strongly supported?<\/i>
      \n<\/i>\u2013 The claims above most strongly support which of the following assertions?<\/i>
      \n<\/i>\u2013 Which of the following can be properly inferred from the passage?<\/i>
      \n<\/i>
      \nOne of the most salient features is the noun being used to describe the paragraph we read. Remember, when we\u2019re doing Strengthen, Weaken, Evaluate, and Assumption, we\u2019re going to almost always see the paragraph described as one of the following: argument, plan, prediction, or hypothesis. Those nouns connote the idea that there will be an opinion within the paragraph:<\/p>\n

      Arguments<\/i><\/b> have an opinionated conclusion, based on some (untouchable) evidence.
      \nPlans<\/i><\/b> have the opinion that if we follow this plan, we will achieve the stated goal.
      \nPredictions<\/i><\/b> contain a conclusion that is in the future tense, thus an opinion.
      \nHypothesis<\/i><\/b> means that our author will be opining some \u2018causal explanation\u2019 for a curious fact.<\/p>\n

      With Inference, you see that the nouns being used connote that we\u2019re just reading some facts: statements, information, claims,<\/b> or passage<\/b>
      \n<\/b>
      \n<\/b>Inference may be asked in the \u201cmust be true \/ properly inferred\u201d style (indicating 100% provability), or they may be asked in the \u201cmost strongly supported\u201d style (indicating that the correct answer is the most <\/i>provable claim, even if not 100% provable).<\/p>\n

      Students often confuse \u201cmost strongly support\u201d Inference question stems with a Strengthen question stem.
      \nINFERENCE<\/b>: \u00a0 The statements above most strongly support which of the following conclusions?
      \nSTRENGTHEN<\/b>: Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument?<\/p>\n

      The two big differences are that Inference deals with statements\/information, while Strengthen deals with arguments\/plans\/hypotheses, and that in Inference questions the paragraph provides support for the correct answer choice, while in Strengthen questions the correct answer choice provides support for the paragraph.<\/p>\n

      What am I Reading For on an Inference Question?<\/h4>\n

      Remember, Inference is specifically not <\/i>giving us arguments and plans. We\u2019re just getting two or more facts and being asked which answer is derivable from those facts.<\/p>\n

      To draw a valid inference = to draw a valid conclusion. Validity means that we can derive an idea from the available evidence without speculation or exaggeration.<\/p>\n

      In Reading Comp, correct answers to Inference questions usually paraphrase something we know from the passage, but they use new and unexpected wording or some sort of inverted syntax. Pretend that in line 20 of an RC passage we are told that \u201cGeorge Washington wore a military cap to his Inauguration as the first President of the U.S.\u201d<\/p>\n

      Can we infer that
      \n(A) He wore the cap because it was a cold January day.
      \n(B) All former generals have to wear military caps.
      \n(C) He thought it flattered his deep blue eyes.<\/p>\n

      Of course not. None of those are provable claims. They are speculations or overstatements.
      \nWe can infer weird restatements such as these:
      \n(A) Not all Presidents are sworn in hatless.
      \n(B) On the first day of the American Presidency, at least some parts of the first President\u2019s scalp were not visible.
      \n(C) People seeing George Washington for the first time at his Inauguration could not have conclusively determined Washington\u2019s level of baldness.<\/p>\n

      The personality of CR Inference questions is a little different: the correct answer almost always pulls together two or more<\/i> facts provided.<\/p>\n

      Pretend we read a CR Inference paragraph that said, \u201cGeorge Washington wore a military cap to his Inauguration as the first President of the U.S. He wore this same cap during the Battle of Yorktown.\u201d<\/p>\n

      Can we think of a safely worded claim that pulls information from both sentences?
      \nA) Presidents do not always begin their terms wearing totally new garments.<\/p>\n

      \u201cPresidents begin their terms\u201d pulls info from the first sentence. \u201cNot wearing totally new garments\u201d comes from knowing that the cap he wore on Inauguration day had been worn before at the Battle of Yorktown.<\/p>\n

      So, in summary, what are we reading for when we read an Inference paragraph? We are reading for two or more facts that could be synthesized in order to derive a true claim<\/i><\/b>.<\/p>\n

      Very often, this synthesis comes about because the two or more facts contain some overlapping piece of information (in this case, both facts referenced GW\u2019s hat). There are four main types of Inferences:<\/p>\n

      1. Math-y<\/strong><\/p>\n

        \n
      • Spain beat France in regulation. However, France scored more goals in the 2<\/i>nd<\/i> half.<\/i>
        \n<\/i>Infer: Spain scored more in the 1st half \/ Spain\u2019s margin of victory in the 1st half was larger than France\u2019s margin of victory in the 2nd half<\/li>\n
      • My rent is scheduled to increase next month. Nonetheless, it will represent the same proportion of my income.<\/i>
        \n<\/i>Infer: My income is also going to be higher next month (increasing by the same multiplier)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        2. Apply a Rule<\/strong><\/p>\n

          \n
        • For a grilled cheese to be delicious, the cheese must be melted into liquid form and the bread must be toasted but not burned. The cheese Patrick is using to make grilled cheeses for his wedding feast is so cold and dense that liquefying it will take at least five minutes of high heat, which is more than enough time to burn the bread he\u2019s using.<\/i><\/li>\n
        • Infer: At least one item at Patrick\u2019s wedding feast will not be delicious. (many different ways we could state the inference, but applying the rule to my specific situation tells us that these will not be delicious grilled cheeses)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          3. Causal<\/strong><\/p>\n

            \n
          • Patrick always buys his shampoo at CVS. Recently, CVS stopped offering Herbal Essences shampoo. As a direct result, the cost of Patrick\u2019s hair care went up.<\/i><\/li>\n
          • Infer: Patrick was previously buying Herbal Essences. He is now buying a different shampoo, and that new shampoo costs more.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

            4. Straddle the Pivot<\/strong><\/p>\n

              \n
            • Patrick is a mean teacher. However, he gives his students candy.
              \n<\/i>Infer: Not all candy-giving teachers are nice.<\/li>\n
            • People think that New York City is the most expensive city in the country. Yet, the cost per square foot of real estate in San Francisco is much higher than that in New York City.<\/i><\/li>\n
            • Infer: New York City is not necessarily the most expensive city in the country.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

              Math-y and Rule-based inferences tend to feel more like Must Be True. Causal and Straddle the Pivot tend to go more with Most Strongly Supported.<\/p>\n

              How, and to What Extent, Should I Pre-phrase a Potential Correct Answer on Inference?<\/h4>\n

              <\/b>We are reading to see if we can combine two or more of the provided facts to derive some true claim (or incredibly likely claim, if we\u2019re doing \u201cmost supported\u201d). When we successfully find an available inference we can make from the paragraph, we should certainly anticipate that the correct answer will probably reinforce or reward that.<\/p>\n

              But we should stay very flexible. Ultimately, the only standard of right or wrong on Inference is, \u201cCould <\/i>you prove this answer choice, using only the information provided in the paragraph?\u201d<\/p>\n

              So the correct answer is under no obligation to tie everything together or to present the \u2018coolest\u2019 takeaway. The correct answer just has to be the most provable claim. Keep any inference you discovered in your mind as your mantra of what the correct answer will probably sound like, but give each answer choice a fair hearing by asking, \u201cCould I prove this, using the statements I just read?\u201d<\/p>\n

              What will frequently happen with correct answers is that they will be a spin-off inference of what we inferred. For example, if we inferred \u201cSpain outscored France in the first half\u201d, the correct answer might say \u201cSpain scored at least once in the first half\u201d. If we inferred \u201cthe cost of paying for parking was more than the combined costs of taking the train and taking a Lyft from there\u201d, the correct answer might say \u201cThe Lyft ride was cheaper than the cost of paying for parking\u201d.<\/p>\n

              Those answers can feel annoying, because we\u2019re like, \u201cYes, but I know even more than that!\u201d It doesn\u2019t matter. You can sign off on the truth of those answers, so they are correct. In general, expect that when you walk out of your real GMAT, you\u2019ll reflect on all the stuff you studied that you never even saw on your test and feel like, \u201cYes, but I know even more than that!\u201d<\/p>\n

              What About Answer Choice Tendencies?<\/h4>\n

              Since we are trying to find the most provable claim, this is a question type for which strong or new language in the answer choices should be a big red flag.<\/p>\n

              There are three big categories of strength of language:
              \nCERTAIN: all, only, never, unless, requires, must
              \nMORE THAN 50%:\u00a0 most, typically, generally, usually, likely, tends to, probably
              \nAT LEAST ONE:\u00a0 some, sometimes, can, may, might, not all, not always, need not<\/p>\n

              When you\u2019re doing Reading Comp, Assumption, or Inference, you should always consider the two stronger levels of language to be red flags; this doesn\u2019t mean they\u2019re automatically wrong, but it means you have to research in the passage whether you\u2019re justified in saying something this strong.<\/p>\n

              Meanwhile, when you\u2019re doing Strengthen, Weaken, or Explain Discrepancy, all of which begin with the words \u201cWhich of the following, if true, most \u2026\u201d, then the weakest level of language is a red flag. An answer choice isn\u2019t going to have much impact if it\u2019s only saying \u201cat least in one case this is true\u201d.<\/p>\n

              Inference Questions: Takeaways<\/h2>\n

              If we want to improve at Inference questions on RC and CR, we need to remember that we\u2019re not allowed to speculate or exaggerate. We\u2019re only allowed to pick answers we feel like we can derive from the provided information. If nothing is 100% provable, then pick the most provable option. If you need to guess quickly, avoid strong language.<\/p>\n

              For CR, you can go one layer farther and proactively read the paragraph looking for facts that can be combined. In particular, if you see quantified wording, look for a math-y inference. If you see causal wording (e.g., \u201cbecause of this\u201d, \u201cdue to\u201d, \u201cthis allows\u201d, \u201cthis makes possible<\/i>), look for a causal inference. If you see a Rule (e.g., \u201cif\/then\u201d, \u201calways\u201d, \u201conly\u201d, \u201censures\u201d, \u201crequires\u201d, \u201cguarantees\u201d<\/i>), look for an inference you can make by applying that rule to a specific situation. If you see the paragraph is divided up by a but \/ yet \/ however<\/i>, think about what safely worded claim you could create that would integrate both sides of that pivot.<\/p>\n

              GMAT Verbal Practice Questions<\/h2>\n

              Let\u2019s look at two sample GMAT-type questions. The first will walk you through how to solve an Inference question. The second one, try the method on your own:<\/p>\n

              GMAT Verbal Question 1<\/h3>\n\t
              \t\t

              \nRandall: Many of the productions of my plays by amateur theater groups are poorly done, and such interpretations do not provide a true measure of my skills as a dramatist.<\/p>\n

              Which one of the following can be properly inferred from Randall\u2019s statement?<\/p>\n

              (A) Some amateur theater groups\u2019 productions of Randall\u2019s plays provide a true measure of his skills as a dramatist.
              \n(B) All amateur theater group productions of Randall\u2019s plays that are not poorly done provide a true measure of his skills as a dramatist.
              \n(C) All of the productions of Randall\u2019s plays by amateur theater groups that do not provide a true measure of his skills as a dramatist are poorly done.
              \n(D) If a production of a dramatist\u2019s play is well done, then it provides a true measure of his or her skills as a dramatist.
              \n(E) At least some amateur theatrical groups\u2019 productions of Randall\u2019s plays fail to provide a true measure of his skills as a dramatist.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

              Step 1<\/strong>: Identify the Question Type:\u00a0<\/em>The keywords \u201cproperly inferred\u201d in the question stem are a sure sign of an Inference question.<\/p>\n

              Step 2:<\/strong> Untangle the Stimulus:<\/em>\u00a0Randall\u2019s comments can be reduced to an if\/then statement: If productions of his plays are poorly done, then they don\u2019t provide a true measure of his skills as a dramatist. And many amateur theater groups perform his plays poorly.<\/p>\n

              Step 3:<\/strong> Predict the Answer:<\/em>\u00a0While we may not be able to predict what the correct answer choice will infer, we can be certain that it is a statement that must be true if we accept Randall\u2019s statement as true.<\/p>\n

              Step 4:<\/strong> Evaluate the Choices:\u00a0<\/em>Since many amateur productions are poorly done, and no poorly done production provides a true measure of Randall\u2019s skills, it must be true that at least some amateur groups\u2019 productions do not provide a true measure of his skills, so (E) is correct. Don\u2019t be afraid of (E) because it seems \u201cobvious.\u201d This is not a test-maker trick\u2014an \u201cobvious\u201d answer is one that must be true, so it works as a valid Inference.<\/p>\n

              (A) seriously distorts Randall\u2019s statement. Just because some amateur productions don\u2019t do him justice doesn\u2019t mean that there are other productions that do. If the GMAT tells you that some marbles are red, you can\u2019t automatically infer that some are not red.
              \n(B) is another sort of distortion. Randall\u2019s statement about certain poorly done productions in no way guarantees anything about productions that aren\u2019t poorly done.
              \n(C) is far too extreme. Randall does establish a correlation between poor production quality and failure to provide a true measure of his skills, but that correlation has only been established for a certain set of productions and can\u2019t be extended to all productions.
              \n(D) attempts to extract a broad principle from Randall\u2019s statement, but his statement is too particular to allow this kind of extrapolation.<\/p>\n

              The answer is (E).<\/p>\n

              GMAT Verbal Question 2<\/h3>\n\t
              \t\t

              \nXYZ Corporation has two divisions, both of which performed consistently over the last five years.\u00a0 The Interment Services Division accounted for approximately 30% of the corporation\u2019s transactions and 50% of the corporation\u2019s profits; the Toxic Household Products Division accounts for the balance.<\/p>\n

              The statements above support which of the following inferences about XYZ Corporation over the last five years?<\/p>\n

              A. Measured in dollars, the total profits for XYZ Corporation have remained stable over the last five years.
              \nB. Interment Services is an increasingly competitive field, while Toxic Household Products are a largely untapped market.
              \nC. The Toxic Household Products Division yields a lower average profit per transaction than does the Interment Services Division.
              \nD. XYZ Corporation\u2019s Toxic Household Products line has remained consistent over the past five years.
              \nE. Most families will, over a given five-year period, spend more money on Interment Services than on Toxic Household Products.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

              Only one of these answer choices MUST be true; let\u2019s take a look at the options:<\/p>\n

              A. We only know about percentages, or proportions, so we can\u2019t draw inferences about dollar amounts.
              \nB. No information is provided about competition for either Interment Services or Toxic Household Products.
              \nC. This is the correct choice; Interment Services has a profit to transactions ratio of 50%:30%, or 5:3, while Toxic Household Products has a ratio of 50%:70%, or 5:7.\u00a0 Therefore, the Toxic Household Products Division is doing more than twice as many transactions as the Interment Services Division, but yielding the same profits.
              \nD. Product lines are not discussed, and therefore can\u2019t be the subject of an inference.
              \nE. Per-family spending is never mentioned, so we can\u2019t infer anything about it.<\/p>\n

              There\u2019s a pattern here: if it\u2019s not mentioned, an inference can\u2019t be drawn about it.\u00a0 Inferences MUST be supported by the evidence provided; remembering this one concept will give you a solid start in conquering inference questions on the GMAT.<\/p>\n

              \t\t\t

              <\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>

              \t\t\t

              <\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

              You\u2019re having lunch with your friend Jane, and you suggest getting hot fudge sundaes for dessert; Jane tells you that she doesn\u2019t eat hot fudge sundaes. In real life, you could draw several valid inferences from this: she\u2019s lactose intolerant, she has sensitive teeth and so can\u2019t eat frozen desserts, she\u2019s on a diet and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":45832,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[55],"tags":[56,84],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13512"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13512"}],"version-history":[{"count":14,"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13512\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":50098,"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13512\/revisions\/50098"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/45832"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13512"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13512"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13512"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}