Illustrative example
All deliveries arrive before noon.
“A delivery arrives at 2 pm.”
Draw an inference
Decide how well a conclusion is supported by the facts you are given.
View guidanceWatson Glaser Test
The five sections, inferences, assumptions, deduction, interpretation and argument evaluation, the 40 items in 30 minutes for UK Watson-Glaser III, the item-banked format that allows papers to vary, the norm-group scoring law firms use, and where to practise each section.
- 40 questions
- 30 minutes
- Worked solutions
Free · No sign-up · Scored the moment you finish
Watson Glaser Style Test 1
The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal is Pearson’s critical thinking test, published as 40 items requiring 30 to 40 minutes. Employers, UK law firms especially, commonly hold candidates to the 30 minute end of that range, which is the clock this test uses, and the five sections below run in Pearson’s order with Pearson’s own answer labels. The current Watson-Glaser III assembles each sitting from a large item bank, matching the number of items, the difficulty levels and the content themes across candidates rather than giving everyone the same paper; this test is one fixed form of that same shape.
This test follows the five-section structure of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal: 40 questions in 30 minutes, in five labelled sections. Section 1, Inference (5 questions): judge each proposed inference as True, Probably True, Insufficient Data, Probably False or False. Section 2, Recognition of Assumptions (12 questions): decide whether a proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in a statement. Section 3, Deduction (5 questions): decide whether a conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. Section 4, Interpretation (6 questions): decide whether a conclusion follows beyond a reasonable doubt from a short passage. Section 5, Evaluation of Arguments (12 questions): judge each argument as strong or weak. Each question repeats its section’s directions, so you always have the rules in front of you. Base every answer only on the material given; only the Inference section allows everyday common knowledge, and only for Probably True and Probably False judgements.
-
Question 1 of 40
Harwick’s town council ran a twelve-month trial of a flat one-pound bus fare on all routes inside the town. Over the trial year, bus journeys rose from 1.9 million to 2.6 million, and Saturday footfall in the town centre was 8% higher than in the previous year. The council funded the trial from a regional transport grant, which has now ended. Three of the five councillors on the transport committee have said publicly that they want the flat fare to continue.
Judge the proposed inference against the statement of facts in the passage. Regard the facts as true. In deciding Probably True or Probably False you may use commonly accepted knowledge that practically every person has.
Proposed inference: “Bus journeys in Harwick were higher during the trial year than in the year before.”
- True
- Probably True
- Insufficient Data
- Probably False
- False
Show the answer
Answer: A. True
The inference is True. The passage states that bus journeys rose from 1.9 million to 2.6 million over the trial year, which is exactly the comparison the inference makes: journeys during the trial year were higher than in the year before. A comparison of two stated figures on the same measure follows beyond a reasonable doubt. The most tempting wrong judgement is Probably True, which wrongly treats a directly stated comparison as if it were only likely.
-
Question 2 of 40
Harwick’s town council ran a twelve-month trial of a flat one-pound bus fare on all routes inside the town. Over the trial year, bus journeys rose from 1.9 million to 2.6 million, and Saturday footfall in the town centre was 8% higher than in the previous year. The council funded the trial from a regional transport grant, which has now ended. Three of the five councillors on the transport committee have said publicly that they want the flat fare to continue.
Judge the proposed inference against the statement of facts in the passage. Regard the facts as true. In deciding Probably True or Probably False you may use commonly accepted knowledge that practically every person has.
Proposed inference: “Some of the additional bus journeys made during the trial year were made by people who would otherwise have travelled by car.”
- True
- Probably True
- Insufficient Data
- Probably False
- False
Show the answer
Answer: B. Probably True
The inference is Probably True. The passage establishes a large rise, roughly seven hundred thousand additional journeys in one year, but says nothing about how those passengers would otherwise have travelled. This is where the section’s allowance for commonly accepted knowledge applies: in an ordinary British town, some people choose between driving and the bus, and a much cheaper fare makes it more likely than not that at least some of the extra journeys replaced car trips. That reasoning cannot reach True, because the passage itself is silent on it, and it is exactly the kind of judgement Probably True exists for. The most tempting wrong judgement is Insufficient Data, which wrongly shuts out the common knowledge this section explicitly admits.
-
Question 3 of 40
A research station on the Fenwick estuary has recorded water temperature every day for thirty years. The estuary’s average summer temperature over the last decade was 1.1 degrees higher than in the first decade of records. Eel numbers in the estuary have fallen in each of the last six years, and the station’s shellfish counts have been broadly stable across the whole thirty years.
Judge the proposed inference against the statement of facts in the passage. Regard the facts as true. In deciding Probably True or Probably False you may use commonly accepted knowledge that practically every person has.
Proposed inference: “Eel numbers in the estuary will be higher next year than they are this year.”
- True
- Probably True
- Insufficient Data
- Probably False
- False
Show the answer
Answer: D. Probably False
The inference is Probably False. The passage reports that eel numbers have fallen in each of the last six years. Nothing guarantees what happens next year, so neither True nor False is available, but a six-year unbroken decline gives a real basis for judgement, and common experience of such runs makes a rise next year less likely than a further fall. More likely to be false than true is exactly the Probably False rung. The most tempting wrong judgement is Insufficient Data: it treats the future is not stated as no basis for judging, when the trend in the facts, plus the everyday knowledge this section admits, tips the balance clearly one way.
-
Question 4 of 40
A research station on the Fenwick estuary has recorded water temperature every day for thirty years. The estuary’s average summer temperature over the last decade was 1.1 degrees higher than in the first decade of records. Eel numbers in the estuary have fallen in each of the last six years, and the station’s shellfish counts have been broadly stable across the whole thirty years.
Judge the proposed inference against the statement of facts in the passage. Regard the facts as true. In deciding Probably True or Probably False you may use commonly accepted knowledge that practically every person has.
Proposed inference: “Shellfish counts at the station have fallen sharply over the thirty years of records.”
- True
- Probably True
- Insufficient Data
- Probably False
- False
Show the answer
Answer: E. False
The inference is False. The passage states that shellfish counts have been broadly stable across the whole thirty years. A sharp fall over the same period is incompatible with that: a count cannot be both broadly stable and sharply falling over the same thirty years. An inference that contradicts a stated fact is False. The most tempting wrong judgement is Probably False, which concedes too much: when the passage directly contradicts the inference there is no residual likelihood to weigh, and the bottom rung of the ladder applies.
-
Question 5 of 40
Harwick’s town council ran a twelve-month trial of a flat one-pound bus fare on all routes inside the town. Over the trial year, bus journeys rose from 1.9 million to 2.6 million, and Saturday footfall in the town centre was 8% higher than in the previous year. The council funded the trial from a regional transport grant, which has now ended. Three of the five councillors on the transport committee have said publicly that they want the flat fare to continue.
Judge the proposed inference against the statement of facts in the passage. Regard the facts as true. In deciding Probably True or Probably False you may use commonly accepted knowledge that practically every person has.
Proposed inference: “Saturday footfall in the town centre was higher during the trial year than in any of the five years before it.”
- True
- Probably True
- Insufficient Data
- Probably False
- False
Show the answer
Answer: C. Insufficient Data
There is Insufficient Data. The passage gives exactly one footfall comparison: the trial year against the year immediately before it, 8% higher. The inference reaches back five years, and the passage says nothing about the four years before that comparison. Footfall in those years could have been higher or lower than the trial year’s, and nothing in the facts or in everyday knowledge leans either way, so there is no basis for judging. The most tempting wrong judgement is Probably True, which quietly stretches a one-year comparison into a five-year record.
-
Question 6 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “Our branch will beat last year’s donation total; we have twice as many volunteers collecting this year.”
Proposed assumption: “How much money a branch collects depends in part on how many volunteers it has out collecting.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: A. Assumption made
The assumption is made. The statement predicts a higher total and gives one piece of evidence for it: twice as many volunteers. For that evidence to support that prediction at all, the amount collected must depend at least in part on how many volunteers are out collecting. Someone who believed volunteer numbers made no difference could not sensibly offer them as the ground for the forecast. The link between the evidence and the conclusion is itself the thing taken for granted, which is what makes it harder to spot than a factual presupposition.
-
Question 7 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “Since the harbour car park now takes card payments only, visitors without a bank card should be given an hour’s free parking.”
Proposed assumption: “The greater part of the people parking at the harbour settle up using a bank card.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: B. Assumption not made
The assumption is not made. The statement proposes a concession for visitors who have no bank card. Its logic needs such visitors to exist, but it takes no position on what proportion of visitors pay by card: the case for the concession is the same whether card payers are ninety per cent of visitors or sixty. “Most” is a quantity the statement never relies on.
-
Question 8 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “We should move the staff canteen to a supplier that uses local produce; it will cut our food miles.”
Proposed assumption: “Some staff would notice a difference in the food if the canteen changed supplier.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: B. Assumption not made
The assumption is not made. The statement argues for the move on one ground: cutting food miles. Whether staff would notice any difference on the plate is irrelevant to that argument, and the speaker could sincerely hope nobody notices at all. The proposition is hedged and entirely believable, which is what makes it tempting; the test is necessity, and the statement does not need it.
-
Question 9 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “Since the harbour car park now takes card payments only, visitors without a bank card should be given an hour’s free parking.”
Proposed assumption: “Some visitors have no bank card.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: A. Assumption made
The assumption is made. The proposal is a concession specifically for visitors without a bank card. Proposing it presupposes that such visitors exist: if the speaker believed every visitor had a card, an hour’s free parking for those without one would be a rule about nobody, and the statement could not be sensibly uttered.
-
Question 10 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “I’ll take the earlier train on Thursday so I can be at the depot before the auditors arrive.”
Proposed assumption: “The earlier train gets to the depot before the auditors are due.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: A. Assumption made
The assumption is made. The speaker announces the earlier train as the means to a stated end: being at the depot before the auditors. A means can only be offered for an end if it is taken to achieve it, so the speaker presupposes this particular train arrives in time. Someone who believed the earlier train still missed the auditors could not sensibly give that as their reason for taking it.
-
Question 11 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “We should move the staff canteen to a supplier that uses local produce; it will cut our food miles.”
Proposed assumption: “Some of the canteen’s current ingredients could be bought from a local grower instead.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: B. Assumption not made
The assumption is not made. The statement’s ground is that moving to a supplier using local produce will cut food miles. It takes no position on what happens to the canteen’s current ingredient list: the new supplier might offer a different menu entirely, or grow its own, and the food-miles claim would be untouched. The proposition is modest and plausible, and it sits close to the topic, which is exactly why it tempts. Being easy to believe is not the same as being required.
-
Question 12 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “Rolling out the new rota software to all three warehouses will end the disputes about weekend shifts.”
Proposed assumption: “The software schedules weekend shifts at every one of the three warehouses.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: A. Assumption made
The assumption is made. The statement rests its prediction on rolling the software out to all three warehouses and ending the disputes. If the software did not schedule weekend shifts at one of the sites, that site’s disputes would survive the rollout and the claim would fail. The universal wording is the statement’s own, not the proposition’s overreach.
-
Question 13 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “We should move the staff canteen to a supplier that uses local produce; it will cut our food miles.”
Proposed assumption: “A supplier that uses local produce is available to take on the canteen.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: A. Assumption made
The assumption is made. The statement proposes moving the canteen to a supplier that uses local produce. That proposal is only sensible if such a supplier exists and could take the work on; without that, there is nothing to move to. An enabling condition of this kind is exactly what the statement takes for granted, whether or not the speaker has checked it.
-
Question 14 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “Rolling out the new rota software to all three warehouses will end the disputes about weekend shifts.”
Proposed assumption: “The rota software allocates weekend shifts more fairly than the warehouse managers currently do.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: B. Assumption not made
The assumption is not made. The statement takes for granted that the rollout will end the disputes, but it does not take for granted any particular mechanism. The disputes might end because allocation becomes fairer, or because it becomes consistent and predictable, or merely because staff stop arguing with a machine’s output the way they argued with a manager’s. Since the statement can be sensibly uttered on any of those views, the specific claim about fairness is not presupposed. The tempting mistake is to treat the most natural explanation as a required one.
-
Question 15 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “I’ll take the earlier train on Thursday so I can be at the depot before the auditors arrive.”
Proposed assumption: “Every one of the auditors will arrive at the depot at the same moment as the others.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: B. Assumption not made
The assumption is not made. The statement presupposes an arrival the speaker can be ahead of, but nothing about how the auditors travel. They might come together, or the first might come early and the rest later, and the speaker’s plan would be unchanged. The mind supplies a single arriving group because that is the easiest scene to picture, and what a statement brings to mind is not what its logic requires.
-
Question 16 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “Our branch will beat last year’s donation total; we have twice as many volunteers collecting this year.”
Proposed assumption: “No volunteer will fall below last year’s average.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: B. Assumption not made
The assumption is not made. The prediction rests on volunteer numbers mattering, not on every volunteer matching last year’s rate. With twice as many collectors, the total could beat last year’s while plenty of individual volunteers collected less, so the statement can be sensibly uttered without any belief about per-volunteer amounts. The tempting mistake is to treat a condition that would be sufficient for the prediction as one the prediction requires.
-
Question 17 of 40
Decide whether the proposed assumption is necessarily taken for granted in the statement, justifiably or not. An assumption is something presupposed or taken for granted.
Statement: “Rolling out the new rota software to all three warehouses will end the disputes about weekend shifts.”
Proposed assumption: “The disputes about weekend shifts are still going on at the time the speaker is talking.”
- Assumption made
- Assumption not made
Show the answer
Answer: A. Assumption made
The assumption is made. Saying the rollout will end the disputes presupposes that the disputes are still running: nobody sensibly promises to end something they believe is already over. The statement takes the continuing existence of the disputes for granted.
-
Question 18 of 40
Consider the premises true without exception, even where they conflict with what you know. Decide whether the proposed conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. “Some” means at least a portion, and perhaps all.
Premises:
- All drivers on the night rota hold a category C licence.
- Some drivers on the night rota are apprentices.
Proposed conclusion: “Some apprentices working at the depot do not hold a category C licence of any class.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: B. Conclusion does not follow
The conclusion does not follow. The premises guarantee that the apprentices on the night rota hold licences; they are silent about any other apprentices. For all the premises say, every apprentice in existence might be on the rota and licensed, in which case the conclusion would be false. The trap is the everyday habit of hearing some drivers are apprentices as implying a contrast, that others are not, or that some apprentices lack what the drivers have. In this section “some” means at least a portion, and perhaps all, so no such contrast is available.
-
Question 19 of 40
Consider the premises true without exception, even where they conflict with what you know. Decide whether the proposed conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. “Some” means at least a portion, and perhaps all.
Premises:
- All drivers on the night rota hold a category C licence.
- Some drivers on the night rota are apprentices.
Proposed conclusion: “Some of the apprentices working at the depot hold a category C driving licence of some kind.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: A. Conclusion follows
The conclusion follows. The second premise puts some apprentices on the night rota. The first premise says every driver on the night rota holds a category C licence. Those apprentices are therefore licence holders, and some apprentices hold a category C licence is guaranteed. Note that the conclusion speaks of apprentices generally, which is safe here because “some” only claims at least a portion, and the rota apprentices supply that portion.
-
Question 20 of 40
Consider the premises true without exception, even where they conflict with what you know. Decide whether the proposed conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. “Some” means at least a portion, and perhaps all.
Premises:
- All drivers on the night rota hold a category C licence.
- Some drivers on the night rota are apprentices.
Proposed conclusion: “Any apprentice at the depot is a driver on the night rota.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: B. Conclusion does not follow
The conclusion does not follow. The premises say that some drivers on the night rota are apprentices. They say nothing about apprentices who are not on that rota, and the depot may employ any number of them. Reading some night drivers are apprentices as all apprentices are night drivers turns a statement about part of one group into a statement about all of another.
-
Question 21 of 40
Consider the premises true without exception, even where they conflict with what you know. Decide whether the proposed conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. “Some” means at least a portion, and perhaps all.
Premises:
- No seasonal staff at the visitor centre are trained to lead boat tours.
- Some staff trained to lead boat tours work at weekends.
Proposed conclusion: “Some staff who work at weekends are not seasonal staff at the visitor centre.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: A. Conclusion follows
The conclusion follows. Take the staff the second premise mentions: they are trained to lead boat tours and they work at weekends. The first premise says no seasonal staff at the visitor centre have that training, so none of those weekend workers can be seasonal staff there. That gives at least some weekend workers who are not seasonal staff at the visitor centre, which is exactly the conclusion. The reasoning needs both premises run in sequence, which is what makes it easy to lose, but each step is forced.
-
Question 22 of 40
Consider the premises true without exception, even where they conflict with what you know. Decide whether the proposed conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. “Some” means at least a portion, and perhaps all.
Premises:
- No seasonal staff at the visitor centre are trained to lead boat tours.
- Some staff trained to lead boat tours work at weekends.
Proposed conclusion: “No staff who work at weekends are seasonal staff at the visitor centre.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: B. Conclusion does not follow
The conclusion does not follow. The premises establish something about the tour-trained staff who work weekends: those particular people cannot be seasonal staff at the visitor centre. But weekend working is not limited to the tour-trained. The premises leave open that other weekend workers, with no tour training, are seasonal staff, and one such person would make the conclusion false. A guarantee about some weekend workers has been stretched into a claim about all of them.
-
Question 23 of 40
A survey of 240 allotment holders in one county found that 60 grew fruit as well as vegetables. Of those who grew fruit, 45 had held their plot for more than ten years. Twelve of the holders surveyed kept bees, and every beekeeper among them also grew fruit.
Assume that everything in the passage is true. Decide whether the proposed conclusion logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given.
Proposed conclusion: “Fewer than half of the allotment holders taking part in the survey grew any fruit at all.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: A. Conclusion follows
The conclusion follows. The survey covered 240 holders and 60 of them grew fruit. Sixty out of 240 is a quarter, and a quarter is fewer than half. The conclusion is a direct arithmetic restatement of the passage’s figures, which is as far beyond reasonable doubt as this section’s standard reaches.
-
Question 24 of 40
A survey of 240 allotment holders in one county found that 60 grew fruit as well as vegetables. Of those who grew fruit, 45 had held their plot for more than ten years. Twelve of the holders surveyed kept bees, and every beekeeper among them also grew fruit.
Assume that everything in the passage is true. Decide whether the proposed conclusion logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given.
Proposed conclusion: “At least one of the surveyed beekeepers was a long-tenured holder.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: B. Conclusion does not follow
The conclusion does not follow. All twelve beekeepers grew fruit, and 45 of the 60 fruit growers had held their plots for more than ten years. That leaves 15 fruit growers who had not, and twelve is less than fifteen: the passage’s figures permit every beekeeper to be among the shorter-tenured growers. Since a survey consistent with the passage could contain no long-tenured beekeeper at all, the conclusion is not established beyond a reasonable doubt. The tempting reasoning is that 45 out of 60 is such a large share that the twelve must overlap it, but very likely on the proportions is precisely what this section refuses to accept as “follows”.
-
Question 25 of 40
Maren Glass employs 380 people at its Marnholt works. Last year 41 employees left the works and 52 joined, and the works’ apprentice intake doubled from 8 to 16. The average length of service at the works is now 11 years, two years lower than it was five years ago.
Assume that everything in the passage is true. Decide whether the proposed conclusion logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given.
Proposed conclusion: “Headcount at the works rose last year.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: A. Conclusion follows
The conclusion follows. Over the year, 52 people joined the works and 41 left, a net gain of 11. With joiners and leavers as the passage’s only reported movements, the headcount at the end of the year must exceed the headcount at its start. The falling average length of service pulls the intuition the other way, suggesting decline, but a workforce taking on new joiners is exactly where the average service figure falls while the headcount grows.
-
Question 26 of 40
Maren Glass employs 380 people at its Marnholt works. Last year 41 employees left the works and 52 joined, and the works’ apprentice intake doubled from 8 to 16. The average length of service at the works is now 11 years, two years lower than it was five years ago.
Assume that everything in the passage is true. Decide whether the proposed conclusion logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given.
Proposed conclusion: “Average length of service is longer now.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: B. Conclusion does not follow
The conclusion does not follow. The passage states that average length of service is now 11 years, two years lower than five years ago. The proposed conclusion claims the opposite direction of change, so far from following beyond a reasonable doubt, it is contradicted by the passage outright.
-
Question 27 of 40
A survey of 240 allotment holders in one county found that 60 grew fruit as well as vegetables. Of those who grew fruit, 45 had held their plot for more than ten years. Twelve of the holders surveyed kept bees, and every beekeeper among them also grew fruit.
Assume that everything in the passage is true. Decide whether the proposed conclusion logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given.
Proposed conclusion: “Taking up beekeeping makes an allotment holder more likely to start growing fruit as well.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: B. Conclusion does not follow
The conclusion does not follow. The passage reports that the twelve beekeepers all grew fruit, which is an overlap between two groups in one survey. Makes more likely is a claim about influence, and nothing in the passage speaks to influence in either direction: fruit growers might take up bees for pollination, keen gardeners might do both, or the overlap might be chance. A conclusion that adds a cause to a reported pattern goes beyond the information given.
-
Question 28 of 40
Maren Glass employs 380 people at its Marnholt works. Last year 41 employees left the works and 52 joined, and the works’ apprentice intake doubled from 8 to 16. The average length of service at the works is now 11 years, two years lower than it was five years ago.
Assume that everything in the passage is true. Decide whether the proposed conclusion logically follows beyond a reasonable doubt from the information given.
Proposed conclusion: “The works took on sixteen apprentices last year.”
- Conclusion follows
- Conclusion does not follow
Show the answer
Answer: A. Conclusion follows
The conclusion follows. The passage states that the apprentice intake doubled from 8 to 16 last year. A doubling from 8 to 16 means the previous intake was 8 and last year’s was 16, so more apprentices were taken on last year than the year before. The conclusion restates the passage’s own figures.
-
Question 29 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should the United Kingdom lower the voting age to 16 for all public elections?
Argument: “Yes; political education in schools is thin and inconsistent, and many young people reach adulthood without ever being taught how laws are made, how taxes are raised or how a constituency works.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: B. Weak argument
The argument is weak, and this is the harder kind of weak. Regard it as true: political education really is thin, and that is a serious matter, not a trivial one. But the question is whether the voting age should come down, and a gap in schools is not an answer to it: the argument never connects the two, and the very same fact is commonly offered as a reason against the change. An argument can be substantial and still be weak when it is aimed at a different question, which is the branch of the definition that catches this one.
-
Question 30 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should large employers in the United Kingdom be required to state the salary on every job advertisement?
Argument: “No; employers would set advertised salaries by copying what rivals publish, and pay for many roles would settle at similar levels, leaving individuals less room to negotiate above them.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: A. Strong argument
The argument is strong. Taken as true, as the section requires, it describes a direct consequence of the proposed rule: published figures become reference points, pay for similar roles converges, and individual negotiation has less room. That effect reaches the earnings of large numbers of people, so it is important, and it is about exactly what the question proposes, so it is directly related. That it argues against a measure many find appealing is irrelevant: an argument’s strength is judged on importance and relatedness, never on which side it takes.
-
Question 31 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should the United Kingdom lower the voting age to 16 for all public elections?
Argument: “Yes; those who live longest with a decision have the strongest claim to a say in it.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: A. Strong argument
The argument is strong. It goes straight at the franchise question by naming the ground on which the vote is claimed: length of exposure to the consequences. That is one of the central considerations in any franchise change, so it is important, and it is about precisely the extension proposed. It says in one sentence what a longer argument would say in three, and strength is unaffected by which.
-
Question 32 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should the United Kingdom lower the voting age to 16 for all public elections?
Argument: “No; at 16 most people are still in compulsory education and living at home, and votes cast at that age would be more open to steering by school and household than to independent judgement.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: A. Strong argument
The argument is strong. The section requires us to regard it as true that votes at 16 would be more open to steering by school and household. The independence of the ballot is central to what a franchise is for, so the consideration is important, and it addresses the specific age the question proposes, so it is directly related. Strong arguments exist on both sides of a live question; this is the No side’s serious case, just as the claim about who lives longest with decisions is the Yes side’s.
-
Question 33 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should the United Kingdom lower the voting age to 16 for all public elections?
Argument: “No; turnout among voters aged 18 to 24 is far below the national average, and a democracy in which a whole age group has largely stopped voting has a problem that no change to the franchise will solve.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: B. Weak argument
The argument is weak despite being both true and important. Turnout among young adults is a genuine and serious problem. But the question asks whether the voting age should be lowered, and the argument does not say that the change would make turnout worse, or that it would do any harm at all: it describes a separate failing and, in its own words, one the franchise will not solve. Importance without relatedness is the branch of the weak definition this item tests, and it is the one candidates find hardest.
-
Question 34 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should councils in England be allowed to charge a small nightly levy on overnight tourist stays to fund local services?
Argument: “No; a levy would make short breaks dearer, and towns that depend on tourist trade could lose bookings to places without one, cutting the very income the levy is meant to support.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: A. Strong argument
The argument is strong. Taken as true, it identifies a serious risk built into the measure itself: pricing stays higher drives some bookings to towns without a levy, and the places most dependent on visitors lose the trade the levy was meant to tap. That is an important economic consequence, and it is about the exact power the question proposes, so it is directly related. It is the substantial case against, sitting opposite the substantial case for; both sides of a question can carry strong arguments.
-
Question 35 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should councils in England be allowed to charge a small nightly levy on overnight tourist stays to fund local services?
Argument: “Yes; visitors use the services and residents currently pay the whole bill.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: A. Strong argument
The argument is strong. In one sentence it names the mismatch the levy exists to correct: visitors add to the load on local services while residents carry the cost. Matching who pays to who uses is an important consideration for the places affected, and it is about exactly the power the question proposes.
-
Question 36 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should large employers in the United Kingdom be required to state the salary on every job advertisement?
Argument: “Yes; advertisements that state a salary look more professional than those that do not.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: B. Weak argument
The argument is weak. Even granted as true, the professional appearance of advertisements is a trivial consideration for a question about compelling disclosure across the labour market. An argument can sit on the same side as strong ones and still be weak: this one is related to the question only through a matter of presentation that would justify almost nothing.
-
Question 37 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should large employers in the United Kingdom be required to state the salary on every job advertisement?
Argument: “No; some job boards would need to redesign their advertisement templates to fit the salary information in.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: B. Weak argument
The argument is weak. It is related to the question, and we must regard it as true: some templates would need redesigning. But it fails the importance test. A one-off adjustment to advertisement layouts is a trivial cost against a rule governing pay transparency across the national labour market. An argument resting on a minor administrative inconvenience is weak however true it is.
-
Question 38 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should large employers in the United Kingdom be required to state the salary on every job advertisement?
Argument: “Yes; it spares applicants weeks of work chasing jobs they could never afford to take.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: A. Strong argument
The argument is strong. It is directly related to the question, because stating the salary is exactly what would let an applicant see the problem before applying, and it is important: applications pursued in ignorance of pay waste large amounts of people’s time across the labour market. Nothing about strength depends on length; this argument states a substantial on-question consequence in one clause.
-
Question 39 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should councils in England be allowed to charge a small nightly levy on overnight tourist stays to fund local services?
Argument: “Yes; the United Kingdom takes less of its national income in tourism taxes than most comparable European countries, and our overall tax system leans more heavily on income than on consumption.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: B. Weak argument
The argument is weak, and not because it is slight: the balance of a national tax system between income and consumption is a substantial matter. It is weak because it answers a different question. What is asked is whether councils should be able to charge overnight visitors to fund local services; an international comparison of tax mixes says nothing about what that power would do for the places that used it, and would read the same whether the levy helped those towns or harmed them.
-
Question 40 of 40
Decide whether the argument is strong or weak. A strong argument is both important and directly related to the question. Regard the argument as true, and set your own attitude to the question aside. “Should” asks whether the proposed action would promote the general welfare of the people of the United Kingdom.
Question: Should councils in England be allowed to charge a small nightly levy on overnight tourist stays to fund local services?
Argument: “No; hotel booking websites would have to update their price displays to show the levy.”
- Strong argument
- Weak argument
Show the answer
Answer: B. Weak argument
The argument is weak. It is true and related, but of trivial importance: updating price displays is routine work that booking platforms already do whenever charges change. An argument whose whole weight is a minor administrative task cannot bear on whether councils should have the power at all.
Prepare for employers like
What is the Watson Glaser test?
The Watson Glaser test is a critical thinking assessment published by Pearson TalentLens and the classic screening test at UK law firms. It presents 40 questions in 30 minutes in the UK Watson-Glaser III version, testing five skills: drawing inferences, recognising assumptions, deduction, interpretation and evaluating arguments. Questions are drawn from a randomised item bank, so papers can differ between candidates, and results are available immediately.
Which Watson Glaser test you sit depends on the employer and the role: an entry-level position will not be given the same assessment as a graduate or managerial one.
How a Watson Glaser test works
Four things to know before you sit one. Timings and difficulty vary with the level of the role.
- FormatFive sections, one paper
- Short passages followed by statements, each answered from a fixed set of options that changes by section, such as true, probably true or insufficient data for inferences. Items come from a randomised bank, so no two candidates sit the same paper.
- Pace30 minutes for WG III
- The UK Watson-Glaser III has a 30-minute limit, or 45 seconds per item on average. Confirm the edition and any approved adjustments in your invitation.
- DifficultyNo knowledge, fine distinctions
- Nothing to revise; the difficulty is in the distinctions, such as a deduction that must follow against an inference that probably does, and in judging an argument's strength rather than its truth.
- ScoringAgainst a norm group, instantly
- Your score is compared with a norm group of similar education or profession and reported to the employer immediately. Competitive law firms look for the upper quarter.
Watson Glaser: assessment names, formats and timings
Match the name in your invitation to the assessment below. Timings marked “approx.” are completion estimates; other published durations are limits for the named version.
| Assessment | What it measures | Questions | Timing |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inferences | How probable a conclusion is, given a passage; true, probably true, insufficient data, probably false or false | Part of 40 | Shared 30 min (WG III) |
| Recognising assumptions | Whether a statement takes something for granted that the passage does not say | Part of 40 | Shared 30 min (WG III) |
| Deduction | Whether a conclusion necessarily follows from the premises | Part of 40 | Shared 30 min (WG III) |
| Interpretation | Whether a conclusion follows beyond reasonable doubt from the information given | Part of 40 | Shared 30 min (WG III) |
| Evaluating arguments | Whether an argument is strong or weak, regardless of whether you agree with it | Part of 40 | Shared 30 min (WG III) |
Counts and timings vary by role level and by the version an employer licences. Check the instructions on the screen before you start. Facts checked 11 September 2026.
Watson-Glaser III in the UK has 40 items in 30 minutes. Other versions and approved adjustments can differ; the five skills below share one overall allowance.
Official sources for assessment names and timings
What Watson Glaser assessment formats look like
A visual guide to the skills and response formats covered on this page. Your invitation tells you which assessments to prepare for.
Illustrations by Practice Aptitude Tests · not official test screenshots
Illustrative example
Does the evidence support it?
Claim → Evidence → Conclusion
Relevant?Supported?
Evaluate the reasoning, not your opinion.
Evaluate an argument
Judge the strength and relevance of an argument, rather than whether you agree with it.
View guidanceEmployers who set Watson Glaser tests
If you know which company invited you, start there: the employer guide tells you which Watson Glaser assessment sits at which stage of that firm's process.
- Hogan LovellsSent by email alongside the online application
- FreshfieldsThe critical thinking test in the application process
Not listed? Browse all employer guides.
Practise with the full pack
The free test shows you the style. A pack gives you the pace: 45 seconds on average a question, marked, with the working shown.
Unlock 10 Watson Glaser practice tests
£39 a year, or £29 a month. Cancel any time
- 10
- practice tests
- 250
- questions, all solved
Practice Aptitude Tests · Original data
How our test takers score
Results from every test in our Watson Glaser pack, past and present.
66,033completed sittings · 2026 edition
Key findingWatson Glaser test takers gain 7 points by their fifth practice test.
Average score69%Half scored 70% or more
Top quarter scored80%+The 75th percentile
Full marks1 in 18of sittings scored 100%
Gain from practice+7 ptsFirst test to fifth test
How scores spread
34% scored 80% or more, and 3% scored under 40%.
Share of sittings in each score band.
Practice pays
Regular practisers went from 66% on their first test to 73% on their fifth.
2,020 people who took five or more tests.
Does speed help?
Speed pays here. The quickest quarter scored 11 points higher than the slowest.
Quickest quarter75%
Slowest quarter64%
Typical pace: 34 seconds a question.
Share this data
Link to these figuresGoes straight to the chart.
Embed on your siteCredit link included.
Download imageSource printed on it.
Download
Watson Glaser is a trademark of its respective owner. Practice Aptitude Tests is not affiliated with Watson Glaser and our practice tests are not endorsed by them.