Bocconi Test key terms

The central claim or point that a passage is built to convey. It is broader than any single detail and should account for most of the text's content when stated in one sentence.

A conclusion drawn from evidence in the text rather than stated directly. A defensible inference must be strongly supported by what the passage says plus ordinary background knowledge.

The attitude a writer conveys toward the subject, such as skeptical, enthusiastic, or neutral. Tone is signalled by word choice, sentence rhythm, and the amount of hedging.

The reason a text was written, for example to persuade, to explain, to criticize, or to entertain. Purpose differs from main idea: it describes the writer's aim, not just the content.

A restatement of a passage's meaning in different words while keeping the original sense intact. Good paraphrases preserve logical relationships such as cause, contrast, and condition rather than swapping synonyms mechanically.

The associations or emotional colouring a word carries beyond its literal meaning. Words with similar dictionary definitions can differ sharply in connotation, which often reveals an author's attitude.

A specific fact, example, or quotation used to back up a broader claim. Details are evidence, and distinguishing them from the main point is essential when summarising or evaluating a passage.

A statement offered as evidence or reason inside an argument. Premises are what the arguer asks you to accept so that the conclusion can follow from them.

The claim an argument tries to establish on the basis of its premises. It is often signalled by words such as therefore, so, or hence, but it may also appear first.

An unstated belief the argument needs in order for its premises to support its conclusion. If the assumption is false the reasoning collapses, which makes assumptions a prime target in evaluation questions.

To add information that makes a conclusion more likely to be true, either by supporting the reasoning link or by ruling out an alternative explanation. Strengthening does not require proving the conclusion.

To add information that makes a conclusion less likely, typically by undermining a premise, exposing a gap, or offering a rival explanation that fits the same evidence.

A recurring pattern of faulty reasoning, such as confusing correlation with causation or generalising from a tiny sample. Naming the flaw helps explain why an argument's evidence fails to support its claim.

A requirement that must hold for something to occur, though it may not be enough on its own. Confusing a necessary condition with a sufficient one is a common reasoning error.

An assertion that one factor actually produces or influences another, rather than merely occurring alongside it. Such claims need more than an observed correlation to be credible.

The difference between two values expressed as a percentage of the original value. Increases and decreases use the starting figure as base, so a rise followed by an equal fall does not restore the original number.

A comparison of two or more quantities by division, showing how many times one contains another. Ratios can be scaled by multiplying every part by the same factor without changing the relationship.

A mean in which each value counts according to an assigned weight rather than equally. Groups of different sizes therefore contribute in proportion to their size or importance.

A rate expressed per single unit of one quantity, such as kilometres per one hour. Unit rates make comparisons easy because all figures share the same base.

Growth applied repeatedly to an accumulating total, so each period's increase is calculated on the previous total rather than the original amount. It produces faster long-run growth than simple interest.

An equation stating that two ratios are equal. Solving a proportion lets you find an unknown quantity when the relationship between two quantities is known to be constant.

A rough measure of size expressed as a power of ten. Comparing orders of magnitude helps you judge whether a computed answer is plausible before doing exact arithmetic.

A rule that assigns exactly one output to each permitted input. The set of allowed inputs is the domain, and the set of resulting outputs is the range.

A statement that two expressions are not equal, using symbols such as less than, greater than, or their or-equal variants. Multiplying or dividing by a negative number reverses the direction of the sign.

The distance of a number from zero on the number line, which is always non-negative. Equations involving absolute value typically split into two cases, one positive and one negative.

A list of numbers in which each term after the first is obtained by adding a fixed constant, called the common difference. The nth term therefore grows linearly with n.

A number between zero and one describing how likely an event is, computed for equally likely outcomes as favourable outcomes divided by total outcomes. Probabilities of mutually exclusive outcomes sum to one.

The middle value of a data set once the values are arranged in order; with an even count it is the average of the two middle values. Unlike the mean, it resists distortion by extreme values.

The property of one integer being exactly contained in another with no remainder. Rules for divisibility by small numbers, such as 3, 4, and 9, allow fast factorisation without long division.

A deductive argument with two premises sharing a term and a conclusion linking the remaining terms. A syllogism is valid if the conclusion must be true whenever both premises are true.

The statement formed by negating both parts of a conditional and swapping them. 'If P then Q' has the contrapositive 'if not Q then not P', which is logically equivalent to it.

An argument whose conclusion follows necessarily from its premises, so it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. Validity concerns structure, not the actual truth of the premises.

The logical opposite of a statement, true exactly when the original is false. Forming negations correctly matters because the negation of a broad claim is usually a narrow existence claim, not another broad one.

Reasoning in which the conclusion is guaranteed by the premises, moving from general rules to specific cases. Deduction preserves truth but cannot generate genuinely new information beyond what the premises contain.

A comparison asserting that a relationship holding between one pair of items also holds between another pair. Solving analogies requires identifying the precise relation, such as part-to-whole or cause-to-effect.

The relationship in which every member of one group is also a member of another, larger group. Tracking inclusion and exclusion correctly prevents errors when reasoning about overlapping categories.