SECTION 1

What are They Testing?

• Problem Solving (16 questions)

Requires candidates to solve problems
Problem solving requires the capacity to:
- Select relevant information
- Identify similarity
- Determine and apply appropriate procedures

• Critical Thinking (16 questions)

Presents a series of logical arguments and requires respondents to:
- Summarise conclusions
- Draw conclusions
- Identify assumptions Changes to Section 1
- Assess the impact of additional evidence Previously there were three question formats:
- Detect reasoning errors 1. Single Answer
- Match arguments 2. Combination Answer
- Applying principles 3. Longer passages
From 2020 onwards, allSection 1 questions are
'single answer' format
When attempting past papers:
a) Tackle Combination Answer - these test
PROBLEM SOLVING the same skills
b) Avoid Longer passages - these are no longer
Overview: relevant

Size: 16 questions -> ½ of Section 1

Requires: us to solve problems using simple numerical operations.
Assesses: our ability to use logic and basic mathematical principles to solve problems
Our task: think on the spot to figure out principles.
We will need to be able to:
- Select relevant information
Maths - Quick primer
- Identify similarity
Some problem solving questions will require some
- Determine and apply appropriate procedures
basic maths.
Most common are:
Question types include: 1) Speed = distance/ time. E.g. 60km an
hour = 120km/2 hours.
- Speed, distance and time 2) Adding large numbers.
- PIN number/ alphabet questions Good techniques are:
- Partial table questions - add the last digit of all values - eliminate
- Logical reasoning incorrect answer options
- Sequences & rules - if all values are even - eliminate odd
- Spatial reasoning answers
- if you have an odd number of odd
numbers your answer must be odd
Logical reasoning:

Deductive Reasoning

DEFINITION: Deductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion is based on the

concordance of multiple premises that are generally assumed to be true.

THIS MEANS: apply the rules to solve the puzzle.

APPROACH:

1) Work out what you do know first, work systemically through the information.
2) Work with just this initially. Don't worry about the rest of the question.
3) Fill in as you go.
Optional: 4) Don't be afraid to guess! Sometimes you won't know exactly what something might be, but if
it’s either a) or b), then try a) and see how far you get. You’ll quickly work out if it's wrong.
5) Be mindful of what you need to work out. Sometimes you won't need to work out every permutation of a
scenario to get the correct answer.

PIN /Alphabet Questions

APPROACH:

1) Work on the principle of a limited number of options:

- 10 single digits (0 to 9)
- 26 letters (alphabet questions)

2) Second step involves 'exclusion rules':

Eg. only certain numbers start with the same letter (as per the last question)
Question solved through applying the relevant rules.

Spatial Reasoning

Overview:
A subsection of problem solving.

What does it test?

a. The ability to visualise objects from different perspectives
b. Construct and deconstruct 2 and 3 dimensional objects
c. Navigate

Can be very tricky!

Type 1: Hidden Shapes

Tests: Spatial reasoning

Remember basic laws of physics - objects can't float!

Advice: Try to reconstruct a 3-dimensional picture in your mind

APPROACH:

1) Calculate how many rows and columns there must be

2) ldentify 'hidden' shapes
3) Where must there be shapes supporting other shapes
4) Add them together

Type 2: Assembling 3-Dimensional Shapes

Requires: be able to picture the shape in 3 dimensions

APPROACH:
 0) Start with the side facing you
1) Identify the corresponding position in the 2-dimensional shape and cross off wrong answers:
- Sides that were not next to each other in the 2-dimensional shape but are in the 3-dimensional
- Sides with the wrong orientation
2) Focus on each adjacent side in turn
3) Ultimately you will be left with one correct answer

CRITICAL THINKING

KEY DEFINITIONS:
Argument: A set of reasons given in support of an idea
Premise: A previous statement or proposition from which another
is inferred or follows as a conclusion

Question Types:
From the argument, you can be asked to identify:
1. Conclusions
2. Assumptions
3. Argument Flaws
4. Strengthening Points
5. Weakening Points
6. Reasoning Errors

Conclusions

DEFINITION:
A conclusion is a proposition that is reached from given premises

Type 1: The /The Main Conclusion

The conclusion / the main conclusion is the final position of the argument, reached by way of the
supporting premise(s).
- 'point' of the whole argument
- will not be present in the text

Type 2: A Conclusion
A conclusion is one that logically follows from the passage (like a 'True' answer in the UCAT)
- might not be stated explicitly
- might not be the main conclusion

Logically follows means:

you cannot help but reach a conclusion, without making any assumptions

Assumptions

DEFINITION:
A thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof
In the context of argument:
An assumption is like a premise that is not stated within the argument

IDENTIFYING ASSUMPTIONS ( AND/OR PREMISES):

Does the argument depend, to any extent, on the statement being true? (i.e. if we assume the
opposite of the statement is true, does this contradict the argument or make it nonsense?)

Yes No

Is it explicitly stated in the passage? Not an assumption underlying the argument

Yes No

Premise Assumption

Flaws

DEFINITION:
An imperfection, often concealed, that impairs the soundness of an argument.
Remember, just because a APPROACH
flaw is present doesn't Top tip:
Main categories of flaw: necessarily mean the Work backwards like a detective:
1) Always read the passage first
argument is incorrect - it
2) Where does the chain from
1. Content flaws just increases the
conclusion to premise not add
2. Structural flaws probability that it is. up?
3) Where does the logical
Flaw types: sequence make an unaccounted
for 'jump'?
By defining this 'jump', you have
Type 1. Causation versus Correlation expressed the flaw in the argument.

Just because two things happen together, it does not mean there is a causal relationship.

e.g.:
Most people who sign-up to take the BMAT examination regularly read The New Scientist. So, we can
conclude that The New Scientist inspires people to take the BMAT.

What about other factors?

Where is the proof?
Might it be coincidence?
Type 2. Circular Reasoning

Is:
Assuming what you're trying to prove.

Looks like:
The premise is a mere restatement of the conclusion,

e.g.: Everything I say is true. This is true because I said it, and everything I say is true...

Type 3. Flawed Analogies

If you want to draw a conclusion about one thing by comparing it to another, then it is crucial that it is a
fair comparison.

Failing to ensure this is colloquially known as 'comparing apples and oranges ’.

e.g.: Last year 100 people died in plane crashes whilst only 10 died on ferry crossings. Therefore, ferries are
10 times safer than planes.
e.g.: Dave’s car is red and Ollie’s car is manufactured in Japan, so Dave’s car is better.

Type 3. Straw Man Fallacy

Is:
Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack.

e.g.:
Some people have suggested that less money should be spent by the UK Government on overseas aid. It is
disappointing that there are those that feel people overseas do not deserve the same human rights, and
would rather keep the money for luxuries.

Is cutting overseas aid the same as cutting human rights?

Is there anything here about keeping money for luxuries?

Type 4. Ad Hominem

Is:
Attempting to undermine an argument by attacking the character of the person delivering it.

e.g.: David claims that endangered species of birds should be protected more stringently. However, David
used to shoot birds with his dad as a child, so how can we take him seriously?

Well, is Dave's argument logical?!? Our task is to judge the argument, not the person who stated it.

Type 5. Structural Flaws

Is:
The content might be correct, but the structure of the argument flawed:

e.g.: All whales are mammals, therefore all mammals are whales
-> All A is B, therefore all B is A
Putting the argument structure into letters will help you spot flaws in the reasoning process
Structural flaws are also called 'reasoning errors' in BMAT.
Structure versus Content
Facts might be wrong, but the structure can still be sound:
All dogs are purple. Rover is a dog. Therefore, Rover is purple.
All A is B. C is A. Therefore, C is B

Weakening points:

• If a premise is weak, the conclusion is weak.

So remove/weaken premises to weaken argument.
So by a weakening point a premise is weakened or wrong

Strengthening points:

A strengthening point must definitely make the conclusion stronger.

So a strengthening point is either an extra premise or a new strong premise.

• Add/strengthen premises to strengthen argument

Summary: Critical Thinking

• Don't confuse a premise with conclusion

• To reach a conclusions, no assumptions must be made
• A conclusion is different to the conclusion
• Assumptions are unstated/supported premises
• Assumptions are reasons for conclusion that are not present in the text
• Put argument structures into the letter format
• Flaw in an argument: premise is ok, and so is the conclusion
BUT: the jump between the premise and conclusion is flawed (and/or large)
• Remove/weaken premises to weaken an argument
• Add/strengthen premises to strengthen an argument