Logical Deductions & Argument Analysis Previous Year Questions (PYQs) for XAT: 1+ Solved Questions with Step-by-Step Solutions

    Solve 1+ Logical Deductions & Argument Analysis previous year questions for XAT with answers and detailed solutions. Free sample questions below.

    Chapter Roadmap: Logical Deductions & Argument Analysis

    Orientation

    Chapter Roadmap: Logical Deductions & Argument Analysis

    Level 1 Importance 0.60 Toughness 0.20 45 sec

    Chapter Map

    Stop Topic What you will master Weightage hint
    1 Logical Deductions and Critical Reasoning Turning statements into logical form, testing what must be true, and avoiding invalid reversals High

    Your Journey

    1. 1
      Start with intuition
      A deduction is a conclusion that cannot be false while the given statements are true.
    2. 2
      Build the toolkit
      Necessary and sufficient conditions, formal translation, and the necessity test.
    3. 3
      Apply the toolkit
      Work with disjunctions, contrapositives, and correlation claims.
    4. 4
      Finish with exam discipline
      Choose only what is forced by the given information.
    This topic is the foundation for argument analysis. The core habit is asking, "Must this be true?"

    What Is a Logical Deduction?

    Concept

    What Is a Logical Deduction?

    Level 1 Importance 0.85 Toughness 0.25 50 sec

    The Core Definition

    A logical deduction is a conclusion that follows necessarily from one or more given statements.

    • Premises: The statements treated as true in the question.
    • Conclusion: The statement that must be true if all premises are true.
    • Validity: The structural guarantee that the conclusion follows from the premises.
    Key Intuition: Deduction is truth-preserving. If the premises are true, the conclusion cannot be false.

    Deduction vs Inference vs Assumption

    Term Meaning Common exam signal
    Deduction Must follow necessarily "Which MUST be true?"
    Inference Reasonably supported, but not always guaranteed "Can be inferred?"
    Assumption Unstated premise needed for the argument "Depends on assuming?"

    In critical reasoning, confusing these three is a major source of wrong answers.

    Logical Deductions & Argument Analysis: Solved Questions with Step-by-Step Explanations (1 Problems)

    Question 1 · Verbal Ability and Logical Reasoning (VALR) MCQ
    When facing various challenges, people in today’s digital world heavily rely on private, online information-seeking behaviour. Individuals who experience depression will often attempt to understand their predicament and seek remedy by searching the Internet for depression-related information and treatment. A recent report says that there exists evidence of many searches comprising the word depression, during and just after the elections, in country Y. So, it can be concluded that the election is experienced by many people in country Y as a truly psychologically traumatizing event—and as such as being potentially depressionogenic.
    Which of the following statements MOST seriously weakens the conclusion drawn in the passage?
    1. A.

      Election is a festival in some countries, people happily choose their leader by casting votes.

    2. B.

      A survey in country Y shows that an election can cause a signi cant increase in the average level of depression.

    3. C.

      Depression-related advertisements are on the rise during and just after the election in country Y.

    4. D.

      Many people do not use the Internet in country X.

    5. E.

      Per day sale of anti-depression drugs is constant across the years in country Y.

    Correct Answer:

    C

    Step-by-Step Solution

    Key idea: This is a "Weaken the Argument" question in Critical Reasoning. The argument relies on a causal link between two correlated events (elections and depression searches). To weaken it, we must show that the correlation does not imply causation, or that there is an alternative explanation for the observed data.

    Step 1: Deconstruct the Argument.

    Premise 1: People search online for depression info when they are depressed.

    Premise 2: There was a spike in searches for "depression" during/after elections in Country Y.

    Conclusion: Elections are psychologically traumatizing and cause depression.

    Step 2: Identify the Assumption.

    The argument assumes that the intent behind the search was genuine personal distress caused by the election. It ignores other reasons why people might search for a specific keyword.

    Step 3: Evaluate Options to find the Weakener.

    Option A: Discusses other countries. Irrelevant to Country Y.

    Option B: Supports the conclusion by confirming elections increase depression.

    Option C: States that depression-related advertisements increased during this period. If ads were running, people might click/search due to marketing exposure rather than internal psychological trauma. This provides an alternative cause for the spike in searches, breaking the link between "search volume" and "personal trauma."

    Option D: Discusses Country X. Irrelevant.

    Option E: Constant drug sales might suggest stable clinical depression, but online searching is a broader behavior. While it weakens slightly, Option C directly attacks the mechanism of the evidence (the search itself) by offering a more immediate alternative explanation for the specific data point cited. In critical reasoning, an alternative cause for the specific evidence is a stronger weakener than general statistical stability which might have lag effects. However, let's re-evaluate C vs E.

    Re-evaluation:

    Option C suggests the searches were driven by ads. If I see an ad for "Depression Help," I might click it out of curiosity or because it appeared, not because I am depressed. This directly undermines the premise that "Search = Depression."

    Option E says drug sales are constant. This implies the clinical prevalence didn't change. But the argument is about "psychologically traumatizing event" leading to "seeking remedy." One can seek info without buying drugs immediately.

    Option C is the classic "Alternative Explanation" trap breaker. The rise in searches is explained by supply-side factors (ads) rather than demand-side factors (trauma).

    Answer: C

    More previous year questions (pyqs) in this unit

    chapter
    Logical Deductions & Argument Analysis Previous Year Questions (PYQs) for XAT: 1+ Solved Questions with Step-by-Step Solutions

    Solve 1+ Logical Deductions & Argument Analysis previous year questions for XAT with answers and detailed solutions. Free sample questions below.

    A question from this chapter

    Question 1
    When facing various challenges, people in today’s digital world heavily rely on private, online information-seeking behaviour. Individuals who experience depression will often attempt to understand their predicament and seek remedy by searching the Internet for depression-related information and treatment. A recent report says that there exists evidence of many searches comprising the word depression, during and just after the elections, in country Y. So, it can be concluded that the election is experienced by many people in country Y as a truly psychologically traumatizing event—and as such as being potentially depressionogenic.
    Which of the following statements MOST seriously weakens the conclusion drawn in the passage?
    Free preview ends here

    Login to view the complete previous-year questions and solutions

    Creating an account is free. You get the rest of this chapter, step-by-step solutions, and a study plan built around the topics you are actually weak at.

    Login to continueSee plans
    Why MastersUp

    Personalised first. High quality throughout.

    Most platforms hand everyone the same content. Here the content moves with your performance, topic by topic.

    Built around you, not around a syllabus PDF

    Every answer you give moves your topic-level intelligence rate. The next question, the next revision card and tomorrow's plan all change with it.

    Revision that hits your weak spots

    We only revise topics you have actually attempted and are still below the safe bar on — never the same chapter on repeat.

    Questions calibrated to the real exam

    Each question carries a measured toughness. You are served a rung above your current level, so practice keeps stretching you.

    Notes written for recall, not for volume

    Full lesson cards for first study, curated short-note cards for the last mile — with derivations, traps and exam patterns marked.

    One place for everything

    Notes, chapter practice, previous-year questions, test series and full-length papers — all feeding one picture of your preparation.

    Honest progress

    No vanity streaks. Progress here means chapters mastered and accuracy that held up on harder questions.

    Unlock the whole course

    Full notes and short notes, the complete question bank with worked solutions, mock tests, full-length papers, and an adaptive plan that rebuilds itself as you improve.

    View all plansStart free