GMAT CR: Method of Reasoning Question Type

Quick Summary

Method-of-reasoning CR questions on the GMAT test how an argument is structured. A typical stem reads: “In the passage, the author builds the argument by…”. Your task is to choose the option that best captures the way the argument is developed.

Overview

Method-of-reasoning questions ask you to identify how an argument is built. Method-of-reasoning questions in GMAT Critical Reasoning are an important part of GMAT prep because they test both your logical ability and your attentiveness to structure. Unlike strengthen, weaken, or inference questions that focus on proving or questioning a conclusion, these require you to understand how the author or speaker organizes the reasoning. A typical stem appears as: “In the passage, the author develops the argument by…”, and your task is to pick the answer choice that best reflects the structure of the argument.

GMAT CR: Method-of-Reasoning Question Type in Critical Reasoning video

GMAT CR: Method-of-Reasoning Question Type in Critical Reasoning

American
Accent

Indian
Accent

World’s most ‘complete’ GMAT prep course

Understanding GMAT Method of Reasoning Questions

Method of reasoning questions in GMAT Critical Reasoning test not just your logical ability but also your attentiveness to structure. Unlike strengthening, weakening, or inference questions, these do not revolve around proving or disproving the conclusion. Instead, they require you to identify how the author or speaker has developed the argument.

GMAT CR: Method-of-Reasoning question type

The Approach to Solving Method of Reasoning Questions

The method to solve these questions follows the following disciplined steps:

Read the question stem first. This sets your expectation. If the stem asks “The author develops the argument by…,” you know you are looking for a reasoning pattern.
Read the passage or dialogue carefully. Note structural cues such as similarly or thus which signal analogy or conclusion.
Have a broad expectation from the correct answer. This is crucial to avoid getting lost in the complex vocabulary of answer choices.
Go by elimination. As always, it is not about selecting one answer choices but about eliminating four. The one answer choice that is left is your answer choice.

Before confirming an answer choice, verify once more.

Illustrative Example: Analogy-Based Reasoning

Consider the following reasoning:

Japanese texts often make no clear distinction between the colors blue and green because until the modern era, the Japanese language had no distinct word for the color blue, referring to it as a gradient of green. Similarly, ancient Greek texts, such as The Iliad, describe dark blue objects as being black and light blue objects as being gray. Thus, classics scholars believe that ancient Greek also lacked a distinct word for blue, defining dark blue as a shade of black and light blue as a shade of gray.

Question: The author develops the argument in this passage by…

Correct answer: drawing analogy with a known phenomenon to draw a conclusion about an unknown phenomenon

Explanation:

The author refers to Japanese texts and then says “similarly” something holds for Greek texts. Finally, the author concludes with thus. The correct interpretation of the method here is “drawing an analogy with a known phenomenon (Japanese texts) to make a claim about an unknown one (Greek texts).” The essence lies in recognizing that the argument has been constructed by analogy.

Method-of-Reasoning question type GMAT-like example

Illustrative Example: Dialogue-Based Reasoning

Another variation involves a dialogue format. Consider the following reasoning…

David: I am considering pursuing a specialization in mergers and acquisitions rather than one in general corporate law. In today’s corporate climate, corporations have a greater need for mergers and acquisitions specialists, so law firms are recruiting them in larger numbers, meaning such specialists are offered higher salaries.

Amina: I do not think this is a wise decision. As the need for corporate lawyers specializing in mergers and acquisitions grows, the average salary for such lawyers will increase, making hiring general corporate law specialists more affordable by comparison. Then, law firms will begin to hire more such specialists, leading to a sharp increase in their salaries.

Question: In responding to David’s plan, Amina does which of the following?

Correct Answer: Concluding against David’s plan and building an argument in favor of her conclusion.

Explanation:

The second speaker then disagrees and provides reasons against that plan. The correct answer choice here would capture the method as “concluding against the first speaker’s plan and developing an argument in favor of the opposite conclusion.”

Illustrative example of Dialogue-based reasoning GMAT CR question

Why Vocabulary Matters in These Questions

Students often find these questions intimidating because the answer choices use heavy reasoning vocabulary. Phrases like “drawing analogy,” “concluding against,” “supporting with evidence,” or “evaluating implications” may sound complex, but if you already know what you are looking for, the difficulty reduces dramatically.

GMAT-style CR Method-of-Reasoning Question with Explanation

GMAT-style CR Method-of-Reasoning Question

Show Explanation

Video Explanation

Play

Written Explanation

Mind-map: Prosecutor: more companies sued recently for violating anti-pollution laws → previous mayor was more tolerant → Journalist: earlier, fewer companies violated the anti-pollution laws

Missing-link: Not needed

Expectation from the correct answer choice: Something on the lines that the second person provides additional data or an alternate explanation to the findings under discussion for refuting the conclusion reached by the first person.

A. Both the prosecutor’s as well as the journalist’s reasoning is based on information from the same time frame – the tenure of current and previous mayors; hence, to suggest that “the journalist including data from further into the past than the prosecutor’s data” is incorrect. Because this answer choice does not indicate how the journalist’s observation challenges the prosecutor’s conclusion, this answer choice is incorrect.

B. Trap. The journalist does not question the legitimacy of the prosecutor’s reasoning because it uses only a few cases as a basis; the journalist accepts the prosecutor’s data but refutes the prosecutor’s reasoning by citing additional data that the prosecutor had overlooked. Besides, the term “illegitimately” is extremely strong; one needs to be cautious of such answer choices as they are generally incorrect on the GMAT. Because this answer choice does not indicate how the journalist’s observation challenges the prosecutor’s conclusion, this answer choice is incorrect.

C. Trap. The journalist does not question the veracity, or truthfulness, of the evidence presented by the prosecutor; the journalist accepts the prosecutor’s data but refutes the prosecutor’s reasoning by citing additional data that the prosecutor had overlooked. Because this answer choice does not indicate how the journalist’s observation challenges the prosecutor’s conclusion, this answer choice is incorrect.

D. Correct. The prosecutor’s argument is based on the assumption that the number of companies violating the anti-pollution laws in the times of the two mayors is “similar”, and the alternate explanation provided by the journalist introduces evidence that “fewer” companies violated the anti-pollution laws earlier; thus, yes, the journalist introduces evidence that undercuts an assumption made by the prosecutor. Because this answer choice indicates how the journalist’s observation challenges the prosecutor’s conclusion, this answer choice is correct.

E. The journalist does not accuse the prosecutor’s reasoning of generalization; the journalist accepts the prosecutor’s data but refutes the prosecutor’s reasoning by citing additional data that the prosecutor had overlooked. Because this answer choice does not indicate how the journalist’s observation challenges the prosecutor’s conclusion, this answer choice is incorrect.

D is the best choice.

Key Takeaways

Method-of-reasoning questions highlight that success depends on recognizing how an argument is structured rather than debating its truth. Focus on cues such as “similarly” or “thus,” and classify whether the logic rests on analogy, contrast, or causal linkage. In dialogue formats, track how the second speaker positions their response – agreement, disagreement, reframing etc. Practicing these distinctions through GMAT simulations develops clarity, speed, and confidence, reinforcing reasoning discipline that benefits both exam performance and broader analytical judgment.

Parting Thought

Method of reasoning questions reward clarity, not speed. If you discipline yourself to always read the question stem first, connect structural words to reasoning flow, and anticipate the type of method being tested, accuracy becomes achievable. These questions are logical in nature and can be mastered with practice. To refine your skills further, work through GMAT prep course resources that specifically emphasize reasoning strategies, ensuring that you not only recognize the method but also apply it confidently under exam pressure. The skills you develop here shall extend into the MBA application process as well as a career in business mana

Invest 30 seconds...

Help Line

GMAT CR: Method-of-Reasoning Question Type