Cisco
CompTIA
ISC
EC-Council
EXIN
Fortinet
ITIL
Juniper
Microsoft
VMware
Avaya
SAP
Google
NVIDIA
Salesforce
Amazon
Palo Alto Networks
ISC2
Splunk
ServiceNow
All Vendors
  2. Home
  3. Exams
  4. GMAT
  5. GMAT SECTION 3: VERBAL ABILITY

GMAT GMAT SECTION 3: VERBAL ABILITY Exam Questions
GMAT Section 3: Verbal Ability (Page 20 )

Updated On: 28-Feb-2026
Page 20 of 153
PDF with 747 Questions

The original Star Wars film (1977), in which Luke Skywalker saved Princess Leia and battled against the evil Empire, was followed by two equally successful sequels—The Empire Strikes back and Return of the Jedi. Nearly 25 years later, the Star Wars prequels have arrived, and they are even more successful than the original series. The prequels (The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, and the soon-to-be released
Episode III) have shattered box office records, filling theaters with audiences of young children, teenagers, and adults alike.

Which of the following conclusions can properly be drawn from this statement?

  1. The prequels are better than the original and its sequels.
  2. The prequels have been marketed more effectively than the original and its sequels.
  3. The Star Wars films have phenomenal special effects.
  4. Fans of the original films have always wanted more Star Wars stories.
  5. The themes and epic struggles of the Star Wars movies appeal to viewers of all generations.

Answer(s): E

Explanation:

The evidence in the passage points to one conclusion: that the Star Wars films appeal to audience-goers of all ages. The passage tells us that the prequels are even more successful than the originals and that the films are popular among “young children, teenagers, and adults alike.” This suggests that viewers of all ages appreciate the themes in the films. The passage does not compare the quality or marketing of the prequels to the sequels, so choices a and b are incorrect. It does not discuss the special effects in the film, so choice c is incorrect.
Fans of the original film may have wanted more Star Wars stories, but the passage does not state this, so choice d is not a logical conclusion to the argument.



For years, Americans have been told to stay away from fat. Feeding the market of those anxiously watching their waistlines, food manufacturers have filled grocery store shelves with low-fat and fat-free foods. Now, however, some researchers are blaming the fat-free craze for the American crisis of obesity.
Foods without fat, they argue, leave us feeling unsatisfied and craving even more food. As a result, we end up eating a whole bag of low-fat potato chips when we would have only eaten half a bag of regular (fat-laden) potato chips.

Which of the following is the most logical conclusion that can be drawn from the passage?

  1. Avoid a no-fat diet, but eat low-fat foods.
  2. You will likely eat less if you eat foods with fat.
  3. Potato chips of any sort are unhealthy.
  4. The key to weight management is to avoid cravings.
  5. Fat-free foods should be banned from stores.

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

The passage argues that foods with little or no fat leave people feeling unsatisfied, so they are likely to eat more than they would of foods that have a substantial fat content. Although the evidence suggests that eating a low- fat diet is better than a no-fat diet (choice a), choice b is a more logical conclusion, especially because the focus in the passage is how much we eat. The health value of potato chips, which are only used as an example, is not discussed, so choice c is incorrect. Choice d is incorrect because the passage suggests that weight control is a matter of what kind of foods people eat, not the suppression of cravings. The passage does not state that fat-free foods should be banned from stores, so e is not a logical conclusion.



Nearly a decade ago, researchers at Brandeis University conducted an interesting experiment with small robots. The robots were programmed to get as many individual points as possible by finding small metal pucks and taking them to a nest in a corner of the lab. Robots were rewarded with points whenever they found a puck. But their excessive self-interest led to poor performance as robots repeatedly interfered with one another and battled over pucks. Researchers then reprogrammed the robots to share information: Robots would announce when they found a puck and listen to what other robots had to say. The robots were able to gather twice as many pucks as they had before they were reprogrammed.

Which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the experiment described in this passage?

  1. Robots can be taught human behaviors.
  2. The robots were poorly programmed in the first experiment.
  3. The researchers were shocked by the difference in results between the two experiments.
  4. Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group.
  5. Self-interest leads to unproductive behavior.

Answer(s): D

Explanation:

The huge difference in results after the robots were reprogrammed makes d the most logical conclusion: Sharing information can dramatically improve the productivity of a group. Choice a is incorrect for several reasons. First, self-interest and sharing aren’t exclusively human behaviors; animals are also driven by self- interest, and many animals also share (information, food, etc.). Second, the robots were programmed, not taught. The experiment doesn’t really show that the robots learned anything; they did what they were programmed to do, and as a result, they were more successful. Choice b is incorrect because the passage does not suggest that the robots were incorrectly programmed in the first experiment. Nothing indicates how the researchers felt about the results, so choice c is not a logical conclusion. Although the robots were far less productive when they were self-interested, choice e is not logical because they did indeed gather some pucks and because in many instances self-interest can result in highly productive behavior (e.g., self-preservation).



The late 1990s saw the comeback of many rock-n-roll bands that had enjoyed great fame in the 1960s and 1970s, but had fallen into relative obscurity in the 1980s and early 1990s. Bands such as Santana and Aero smith released new albums at the end of the millennium and embarked on worldwide tours to sold-out audiences.

Which of the following, if true, best explains the phenomenon described in this passage?

  1. Not much good rock-n-roll was produced in the late 1990s.
  2. These bands were able to blend elements of classic rock with the new sound of the late 1990s to appeal to a wide audience.
  3. The late 1990s saw an increasing nostalgia for the peace-loving era of the 1960s and early 1970s.
  4. The bands simply got better with age.
  5. A new generation of listeners discovered classic rock.

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

The lack of good music (choice a) may help account for older bands making a comeback, but this is not the best explanation. More convincing is the notion that older bands were able to blend their old sounds with new sounds to appeal to a wide audience — people who enjoyed their older music and people who enjoy the sounds of contemporary music. This would help explain their renewed popularity, because they still have a core of older fans as well as a large contingent of newer fans (younger listeners who were not necessarily familiar with their older music). Choice c is incorrect because a nostalgia for the 1960s and 1970s would mean the bands’ older music would be in demand, not their new music. Choice d is incorrect because this does not account for their lapse into “relative obscurity.” Choice e is incorrect for the same reason as c — if a new generation of listeners discovered classic rock, then they would be more interested in the bands’ older work.



Two small-business owners, Jensen and Ling, could not be more different. Jensen is easy going, easy to talk to, good at delegating responsibility, and quick to acknowledge the contributions of others. Ling, however, is often high strung, generally unfriendly, and unable to give up any authority; she is determined to be involved in every decision. This explains why Jensen’s business is successful while Ling’s business has failed.
The conclusion of this argument is based upon all of the following assumptions EXCEPT

  1. the personality of a business owner is the main factor in the success of the business.
  2. a business leader with Jensen’s type of personality is more effective than one with Ling’s personality.
  3. Jensen and Ling were in direct competition with each other.
  4. Jensen and Ling had similar educational backgrounds and a comparable level of business experience.
  5. Jensen and Ling had comparable businesses operating under comparable circumstances.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

Jensen and Ling did not have to be in direct competition with each other; indeed, they did not even have to know the other business existed. Rather, this argument hinges on other important assumptions. Clearly, the most important assumption is a, that the business leader’s personality is the main factor in the business’s success or failure. The premises focus on the personality traits of Jensen and Ling and jump to the conclusion that their personalities made the difference in their business success. Choice b is incorrect for the same reason; it also forms a logical link between the premises and the conclusion. Choices d and e are incorrect because they state assumptions that are essential in making this an apples-to-oranges comparison. Whatever their personality differences, this comparison does not work if Jensen and Ling were not similarly equipped (with education and experience) and in comparable businesses operating under comparable circumstances






Post your Comments and Discuss GMAT GMAT SECTION 3: VERBAL ABILITY exam dumps with other Community members:

Join the GMAT SECTION 3: VERBAL ABILITY Discussion