What does the Verbal Reasoning section test?
According to GMAC, the section measures your ability to read and understand written passages and to reason about and evaluate arguments. Score scales (opens in a new tab)
GMAC explains that this section is not designed to certify English proficiency: it assesses how well you understand, analyze, and evaluate information written in English. However, limited English proficiency may still affect your performance. Verbal Reasoning (opens in a new tab)
In the score
Scored from 60 to 90, like the other two sections, based on three factors: the number of questions attempted, answer accuracy, and question difficulty and other question-level factors. All three sections count equally toward the total score, which ranges from 205 to 805. Score scales (opens in a new tab)
The score calculation, in the GMAT guideWhat are the two question types?
Twenty-three questions with five answer choices, covering two types mixed throughout the section, as described by GMAC.
Type 1
Reading Comprehension
A passage followed by questions about what it says, what it implies, and how its ideas and viewpoints relate to one another. Topics most often come from science, the social sciences, and business.
This page’s example
Critical Reasoning
An argument followed by a question about its logic: weaken or strengthen it, identify its underlying assumption, explain the role of one part, or resolve a paradox.
According to GMAC, Critical Reasoning measures your ability to construct and evaluate an argument and to formulate or evaluate a plan of action. Reading Comprehension measures your ability to understand words and statements, grasp logical connections between key points, draw inferences, and follow the development of a quantitative concept. Score scales (opens in a new tab)
- An argumentfacts, and the conclusion drawn from them
- A questionwhat to do with the argument: weaken it, strengthen it, find its assumption…
- Five answer choicesonly one answers the question asked
You can take the three sections in any order. In each section, you can mark as many questions as you like. After answering every question, if time remains, you can review them and change up to three answers. Test structure (opens in a new tab)
A worked Critical Reasoning example
An Upsilar-written Critical Reasoning question. Read the argument, choose an answer, then check your work: the explanation follows the strategy below.
The argument
In March, the software firm Arventa moved its customer-support team to a four-day workweek. From March to August, the team took on average 15 percent less time to resolve a customer complaint than it had in the same months of the previous year. The firm’s operations director concludes that the four-day workweek has made the support agents more efficient.
Choose an answer.
The solution, step by step
Correct answer: D — the shorter processing time cannot be explained entirely by a change in the difficulty of complaints.
The method in action
- Identify what the question asks. We are looking for an assumption: something the argument takes for granted without saying so, and without which its conclusion no longer holds.
- Separate the conclusion from its supporting evidence. The fact: since the four-day workweek began, complaints take 15% less time to resolve. The conclusion: the new schedule made agents more efficient. If the entire decrease is due to simpler complaints, it cannot be credited to the new schedule as an efficiency gain. A partial simplification, however, could coexist with that gain.
- Eliminate choices, then check the passage. A, C, and E are off topic: the agents’ opinions, the rest of the year, and other companies. That leaves B and D. Negating D means the entire decrease comes from a change in complaint difficulty, so the cited fact can no longer attribute the decrease to an efficiency gain. B unnecessarily requires a single cause; D rules out only a complete alternative explanation. Answer: D.
The pitfall
B, “the only reason,” is too strong. The conclusion does not require the four-day workweek to explain the entire decrease, only to have contributed to it. Negate B—other causes also played a role—and the argument still holds.
Key takeaways
You can recognize an assumption by negating it: if the argument falls apart when it is negated, it is the right one.
What strategy should you use for Verbal Reasoning?
A three-step Upsilar strategy for all two question types.
Identify what the question asks.
Weaken, strengthen, identify an assumption, find a detail: GMAC notes that each question sets a specific task, and its wording matters. Read it first so you know what to look for in the passage.
Separate the conclusion from its supporting evidence.
In an argument, identify the conclusion and then its support: the question often turns on the gap between them. In a passage, look for transitions such as however, although, and furthermore, as GMAC recommends; they show how the ideas connect.
Eliminate choices, then check the passage.
Eliminate choices that are off topic, then check the remaining ones against the passage, not your memory. GMAC warns that many wrong answers reuse the passage’s words without answering the question. For an assumption question, negate the choice: if the argument falls apart, you’ve found the assumption.
The pitfall to avoid
Deciding whether the conclusion is true. The question is about the reasoning, not the real world: a plausible statement, even a true one, may still be irrelevant. GMAC gives this example: if the question concerns a program’s effects on health, its cost or popularity does not matter.
How much time do you have per Verbal Reasoning question?
Average per question
1 min 57 sec
45 minutes ÷ 23 questions, according to GMAC figures
45 minutes for 23 questions, or 1 minute 57 seconds each: the tightest timing of the three sections, compared with 2 minutes 9 seconds in Quantitative Reasoning and 2 minutes 15 seconds in Data Insights. Read quickly without skimming carelessly: GMAC recommends active reading that focuses on the main points instead of getting stuck on details. Verbal Reasoning (opens in a new tab)
An unfinished section
Incomplete section: a penalty accounts for the number of unanswered questions. So make sure you have enough time to answer all 23 questions. Understand your score (opens in a new tab)
What is the GMAT?, in the GMAT guideHow do you move from understanding the passage to proving an answer?
An Upsilar practice set: read the English passage, then examine a main idea and an inference. The explanations identify the evidence and the limitation for each choice.
Do not translate everything before you reason. Identify the passage’s purpose: what question is being studied, what result appears, and what caveat limits the conclusion? The exercise remains in English; the French explanation makes the reasoning explicit.
Passage
A greenhouse grower installed soil-moisture sensors in half of its growing beds. Workers used the readings to decide when to irrigate those beds, while the remaining beds followed a fixed watering schedule. During the trial, the sensor-guided beds used less water and produced the same weight of harvested leaves per square meter.
The grower viewed this result as encouraging but did not immediately install sensors throughout the greenhouse. The trial had taken place during a mild month, and only one crop had been grown. The grower planned further trials during hotter conditions and with plants whose roots reached different depths. The initial result supported investigating the approach more broadly, rather than assuming that the same savings would occur in every bed.
Choose an answer.
The solution, step by step
B — an encouraging result needs further trials before it can be generalized.
The method in action
- Follow the passage’s progression. The first paragraph introduces the setup and a positive result. The second explains why the producer remains cautious.
- Bring the two paragraphs together. B covers the observed benefit and the decision to test elsewhere. The final sentence explicitly confirms this caution.
- Rule out overstatements. A contradicts the unchanged production and adds “always.” C calls a method used in the control impossible. D invents a result in hot conditions that have not yet been tested. E generalizes from one crop to all crops.
Key takeaways
A main idea must account for both the result and the caveat without ignoring either one.
Choose an answer.
The solution, step by step
C — the result is not enough to draw a conclusion about warmer conditions.
The method in action
- Find the limitation. The passage says the month was mild and announces future trials in warmer conditions.
- Limit the inference. C points out what has not been established. It predicts neither success nor failure in the upcoming trials.
- Eliminate unsupported information. A concerns a change in roots that still needs to be tested; B adds a reduction in labor; D contradicts the unchanged production; E compares costs that were never provided.
The pitfall
A cautious inference can identify a limit in the evidence; it does not have to predict a future result.
Key takeaways
Tie the conclusion to what was actually observed: the period, population, and conditions.
Argument
A cafeteria surveyed people who already buy lunch there. Most respondents said they would choose a new vegetarian dish if it were offered. The manager therefore predicts that adding the dish will increase the total number of lunches sold each week.
Choose an answer.
The solution, step by step
C — choosing the new dish would replace existing purchases.
The method in action
- Identify the conclusion. The manager predicts an increase in total meals, not just sales of the new dish.
- Find the weak link. The survey describes a preference among current customers. It does not distinguish a replacement purchase from an additional one.
- Measure the effect of C. C specifies that customers would switch rather than add visits, weakening the link to total sales. A and E concern feasibility, B repeats a preference, and D provides history that does not affect this distinction.
The pitfall
Weakening the prediction does not prove that no new customers will come; it shows that the cited survey provides little support for it.
Key takeaways
Keep the conclusion’s scope in view: sales of a new product and total sales are different questions.
To practice main ideas, details, and inferences: GMAT Reading Comprehension: map a passage and support your answers
To compare how two pieces of information affect the same argument in opposite ways: GMAT Critical Reasoning: strengthen or weaken an argument
Verbal Reasoning FAQs
The Verbal Reasoning section: is it an English test?
No, according to GMAC: the section is not designed to assess your English proficiency, but your reasoning about information written in English. GMAC warns that this misconception can lead people, especially native English speakers, to underestimate the preparation required.
Are the two question types in separate groups?
No. According to GMAC, Critical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension questions are mixed throughout the section; each has five answer choices.
The Verbal Reasoning section: is it adaptive?
Yes. The section is adaptive, and your answers help adjust the difficulty. Your score reflects the number of questions attempted, answer accuracy, question difficulty, and other question-level factors.
Can you go back and change an answer?
Yes. After answering every question in the section, if time remains, you can review questions and change up to three answers. You can mark as many questions as you like during the section.