Game Changing  

Haha. Well said. In-fact Test-prep companies doesn't work for a 700+ score.

Completely agree. Tricks and Shortcuts cannot get that higher %ile. Its hard work in learning and applying concepts.

Haha I know everyone here is thinking of one particular company when it comes to prethinking 😂

@@akshay0071997 Yeah, I am learning from their course. But here I am, looking for another tip and trick lol

@@jesicarosaline which one??

Sure thing, Cristina.

Your take on the correct answer is spot on. Regarding choice (E), saying that the people may have been lying, or even just mistaken, is going too far. (E) doesn't imply that. After all, the fact that "few people were present" doesn't equate to "Everyone who reported seeing an alligator was alone, and nobody was around to corroborate the reports." Also, notice that (E) is about the entire 1990s. So, few people were present in the early 1990s when fewer alligators were sighted, and then few people were present in the late 1990s when more alligators were sighted. So, the fact that few people were present was a constant while the number of sightings increased. Thus, the fact that few people were present would not have been what underlied the increase. After all, something that didn't change wouldn't be the cause of a change.

@@martymurray6756 Thanks for your response, Marty. Perhaps the mountain lion question just gave me an overly strong impression. I still have reservation about (A) for the alligator question, as I cannot infer from (A) that the number of visitors or users to golf clubs has increased during that 1990s. (In Asia, even with rising human population, we got more buildings but not more golf lawns.) So, I cannot take a further step and infer that "therefore, more sightings for alligators." I did wonder whether rising human population implies that some golf lawns were alligators' habitats and alligators just never left the areas, so more sightings is a result of environmental change instead of growing alligator population. But, I thought that I should not make my own assumptions and so I moved on and chose (E). Could you give me some tips to help me tell when I am making reasonable inference and when I am making my own assumption? Many thanks!

@@martymurray6756 Appreciate your elaboration. It is not the first time that experts told me that I do not need ironclad evidence to weaken an argument. I know I should not confuse weakeners and negated assumptions, but sometimes I just have unstoppable doubts for the weakener candidates due to all kinds of issues. In this case, the issue was golf club-I kept thinking whether there should be a positive correlation between the number of golf players and human population. I wish this question were changed into "reports of alligators appearing in lake or river increased dramatically" (like the option (C)), in which case I would happily choose (A). But anyway, that is my blind spot and thanks for your tips and look forward to your next session!

Reviewing some of the basic topics in Econ 101, such as the ones you mentioned, could be helpful, and any GMAT students who haven't studied those topics previously would likely benefit from making learning about them part of their Critical Reasoning preparation.

I’m guessing Your video quality in settings is set to a low resolution to save data

CR tests skill in seeing what you need to see to answer the questions correctly. For instance, do you see the difference between a choice that's merely worded to resemble what the passage says and a choice that actually affects the strength of the argument? Alternatively, do you see the common-sense connection between an answer choice and what the passage describes? Just as vision of the future, of possibilities, or of connections helps a CEO lead a company to success, vision helps a test-taker achieve CR success.

@@martymurray6756 thanks Marty!!