HPAT-Ireland key terms

A conclusion that must be true whenever the stated premises are true, because the reasoning form guarantees it. The truth of the premises forces the conclusion, leaving no possible counterexample.

A conclusion that does not follow with certainty from the premises, even if those premises are true. The reasoning leaves at least one imaginable situation where the premises hold but the conclusion fails.

A specific scenario in which all the given premises are true but the proposed conclusion is false. Finding one proves the argument form is invalid, so it is a fast test for flawed reasoning.

Something that must hold for a claim to be true, though it may not be enough on its own. If the condition fails, the claim fails; if the condition holds, the claim may still fail.

Something whose presence guarantees a claim is true, though other things might also guarantee it. If the condition holds the claim holds; if the condition fails the claim may still hold for another reason.

A sentence of the form 'if A then B', where A is the antecedent and B the consequent. It rules out A being true while B is false, and nothing more.

The logically equivalent rewrite of 'if A then B' as 'if not B then not A'. Unlike the converse, it always carries the same truth value as the original conditional.

Treating 'if A then B' as if it supported 'if B then A'. This mistake, affirming the consequent, produces conclusions that need not follow from the original conditional.

An unstated premise the argument needs in order to reach its conclusion. Spotting it lets you judge whether the reasoning holds and predict what an answer choice must supply or attack.

A question type asking which added information would make the given reasoning more persuasive. The correct choice supports the hidden link between evidence and conclusion rather than merely restating it.

A question type asking which added information would make the given reasoning less persuasive. The correct choice usually attacks an assumption, offers an alternative explanation, or shows the evidence is unrepresentative.

A different cause or account that fits the same evidence the argument cites. Its existence undermines a conclusion that claims one particular explanation has been established.

The distinction between two things occurring together and one actually producing the other. Arguments that infer cause from mere association are vulnerable unless rival explanations and reverse causation are excluded.

A flaw in which the group studied differs systematically from the wider population the conclusion describes. Results drawn from such a group may not generalise, weakening any broad claim built on them.

A conclusion that extends a finding from observed cases to a wider class. It is sound only if the sample is representative and large enough to support the breadth of the claim.

A flaw where the argument's evidence concerns one group, time, or quantity but the conclusion quietly refers to a different one. The mismatch makes the reasoning invalid despite sounding continuous.

A conclusion drawn from given information rather than stated outright. In the exam you must select the option that follows necessarily, not merely the one that seems plausible or likely.

A problem giving constraints on entities such as people, seats, or times, from which you must deduce a unique arrangement or answer. Systematic tabulation beats guessing at each option.

A quick sketch, grid, or list used to record fixed and excluded possibilities in a puzzle. Updating it as each rule is applied prevents contradictions and reveals forced placements.

A solving strategy that tests each option against the stated rules and discards any that break one. It is often faster than constructing the full solution when the answer must be unique.

Working through quantities, rates, ratios, or percentages embedded in a worded scenario. The skill lies in translating the text into the right relationship before calculating.

A question involving quantities changing per unit of time or per item, such as speed or output. Setting up a clear relationship between the rates usually reduces the work to simple arithmetic.

Checking that all measurements in a calculation use compatible units before combining them. Mixing minutes with hours or grams with kilograms is a common source of wrong answers under time pressure.

Identifying what a person in a scenario is likely feeling from their words, tone, and circumstances. Accurate recognition is the first step before choosing an appropriate response.

Understanding another person's feelings and perspective from their point of view rather than your own. In response options it is shown by acknowledging emotion before offering solutions or information.

Paying full attention, reflecting back what was said, and checking understanding instead of interrupting or immediately advising. It signals respect and often defuses tension in interpersonal scenarios.

A question that invites explanation rather than a yes or no, often beginning with what, how, or why. It gathers more information and encourages the other person to talk freely.

Stating your own needs, limits, or concerns clearly and calmly while respecting the other person. It sits between passivity, which hides your view, and aggression, which overrides theirs.

Working with opposing parties to find a workable outcome by clarifying interests and negotiating rather than assigning blame. Effective responses stay neutral, separate people from problems, and seek agreement.

Helping two parties in dispute reach their own agreement by guiding discussion and keeping it fair. The mediator does not impose a verdict but structures the conversation toward mutual understanding.

The limits on what is appropriate in a working or caring relationship, covering confidentiality, personal involvement, and use of authority. Respecting them protects both parties and is often the key discriminator among options.

Keeping private information shared by others within the circle entitled to know it. Disclosing it casually, even with good intentions, usually marks an option as the wrong interpersonal response.

Cooperating with others so that shared goals are met, including sharing credit and covering gaps. Scenario answers that build consensus and support colleagues typically rank above individual heroics.

Assigning a task to someone else with the authority and information needed to complete it. Good delegation matches the task to the person's capability and keeps accountability clear.

Picking up on context, relationships, and unspoken cues in a scenario before acting. It prevents responses that are technically correct but socially or ethically inappropriate for the moment.

A transformation that turns a shape about a fixed point by a given angle, preserving size and shape. Tracking a single distinctive feature, such as a marked corner, makes the result easy to verify.

A transformation that flips a shape across a line, producing a mirror image with reversed orientation. Unlike rotation, it swaps handedness, so a clockwise detail becomes anticlockwise.

Any rule-based change to a figure, including rotation, reflection, translation, and scaling. Recognising which transformation links successive figures is central to series questions.

A sequence of shapes changing by a consistent rule, where you must supply the next or missing member. Identify the rule separately for position, orientation, and count before choosing.

The consistent relationship governing how elements change across a series or matrix. Stating it in words before looking at options guards against being swayed by attractive distractors.

An answer option designed to look plausible but that fails a required condition. In non-verbal items, distractors often repeat the right rule in the wrong element or apply it once too few.

A non-verbal question of the form A is to B as C is to what, where the link is a transformation. The same rule must map the first pair and the second pair consistently.

A non-verbal item where all but one figure share a property and you must name the exception. Test candidate properties one at a time, such as symmetry, line count, or shading.

Reading a passage and drawing a conclusion it supports without stating it directly. The correct answer stays within what the text implies; tempting options usually add unsupported detail.

The central point a passage is written to convey, as distinct from supporting examples. Identifying it first helps you reject options that are true but peripheral.

The attitude a writer conveys toward the subject, such as critical, cautious, or enthusiastic. Word choice and emphasis reveal it, and questions often ask you to label it precisely.

Correctness in sentence structure, agreement, tense, and word choice. Written English items test whether you can spot the error or select the version that reads cleanly and unambiguously.

Expressing an idea in as few words as needed without ambiguity or redundancy. Preferred revisions remove repetition, dangling modifiers, and vague pronouns while keeping the original meaning intact.