Rank 15 by frequency | 136 questions in corpus (3.0% of all questions)
A Principle (Conform) question works in the opposite direction from Principle (Supporting). Here, you are typically given a principle, situation, or set of statements and asked to identify which answer choice most closely conforms to, illustrates, or matches that principle. Alternatively, you may be given a specific situation and asked which principle it best illustrates. The core task is matching – connecting a general rule to a specific application, or extracting a general rule from a specific case and finding another case that follows the same rule.
Identify the answer that best matches, conforms to, or illustrates the principle or general rule stated in (or illustrated by) the stimulus. This is fundamentally a pattern-matching exercise: does the specific case in the answer correctly trigger the principle's conditions and reach the principle's prescribed outcome?
Your ability to move between the abstract and the concrete – to match a general rule with a specific application, or to abstract a general rule from a specific case. Also tests your grasp of conditional logic (particularly sufficient vs. necessary conditions), your ability to identify contrapositives, and your capacity to distinguish valid applications from logical reversals.
Format 1: Principle-to-Application (more common)
1. The stimulus states one or more general principles. These are abstract rules, often conditional in form ("If X, then Y"; "Anyone who does X should also do Y"; "X is only justified when Y").
In Principle-to-Application format, the principle itself is the "premise," and each answer choice is a potential "conclusion" (application). The correct answer is the one whose specific facts satisfy the principle's conditions and whose outcome matches the principle's prescribed result.
In Situation-to-Principle format, the stimulus situation is the "example," and the correct principle is the generalization that the example illustrates.
Unlike Principle-Supporting (where you find a rule to justify an argument), here you are testing whether a case fits a rule, or identifying what rule a case exemplifies. The logical structure is:
``` Format 1 (Principle -> Application): Given Rule: If [condition], then [result] Correct Answer: [Specific case with condition] -> [arrives at result]
Correct answer (Format 1): - The specific facts in the answer satisfy the sufficient condition of the principle - The outcome in the answer matches the necessary condition (or the contrapositive is properly applied) - All conditions of the principle are met – nothing is missing - The certainty level matches (if the principle says "probably," the answer uses "probably," not "definitely")
Correct answer (Format 2): - The principle, when applied to every fact in the stimulus, produces exactly the judgment or outcome described - The principle is neither too broad nor too narrow for the specific case - The directionality of the conditional matches the stimulus situation
Question stems: - "Which one of the following judgments conforms to the principle stated above?" - "Which one of the following most closely conforms to the principle illustrated above?" - "Which one of the following situations best conforms to the principles stated above?" - "Which one of the following judgments is most strongly supported by the principles above?"
How it works: The stimulus gives you the rule. The answer choices give you five specific cases. You must determine which case correctly follows the rule. This is analogous to a Parallel Reasoning question but at the principle level – you match the logical structure, not the specific content.
Question stems: - "[Person]'s reasoning most closely conforms to which one of the following principles?" - "The situation described above most closely conforms to which one of the following principles?" - "Which one of the following principles is most clearly illustrated by the passage?" - "Which one of the following generalizations does the situation described above most clearly illustrate?"
How it works: The stimulus describes a concrete case. The answer choices are five general principles. You must figure out what abstract rule the stimulus exemplifies and find it among the answers.
Question stems: - "Which one of the following arguments most closely conforms to the principle underlying the argument above?" - "Which one of the following illustrates a principle most similar to that illustrated above?" - "The pattern of reasoning in which one of the following is most similar to the principle illustrated above?"
How it works: The stimulus presents a specific argument. You extract the underlying principle, then find another argument in the answer choices that follows the same principle. This differs from standard Parallel Reasoning because the details and content can differ completely – only the underlying principle must match.
Question stems: - "Which one of the following does NOT conform to the principle stated above?" - "Which one of the following, if true, most closely violates the principle stated above?"
How it works: Four answers correctly apply the principle; one violates it. You must identify the violator. This is effectively the EXCEPT version of Subtype 1.
For Apply-and-Match (Format 1):
1. Satisfies all conditions of the principle. If the principle has multiple conditions (e.g., "If X and Y, then Z"), the correct answer includes both X and Y.
1. Converse error (reversed conditional): The answer concludes the sufficient condition from the necessary condition. Example: Principle says "If you see a crime, you should report it." Wrong answer: "Didn't see a crime, so shouldn't report it." (This is the inverse, not a valid application.)
2. Inverse error: The answer negates both sides without reversing them. Example: Principle says "If A, then B." Wrong answer applies "If not A, then not B."
The correct answer is a valid instantiation (or valid extraction) of the principle. In conditional terms:
`` Principle: If P, then Q Correct answer: [Specific situation where P is true] -> [Q follows] OR Correct answer: [Specific situation where Q is false] -> [P must be false] (contrapositive) ``
1. Conditional rules with clear triggers: "If someone witnesses a crime firsthand, they should report it. If someone only heard about a crime from a non-credible source, they should not report it." Answer choices present people who witnessed, heard secondhand, heard from credible sources, etc.
2. Multi-condition principles: "Compensation consultants who have business ties to the company they advise tend to recommend overcompensation." The correct answer must include the business-ties condition AND use qualified language ("probably" or "tend to").
1. Multiple principles in the stimulus: The stimulus states two or three interrelated principles, and the correct answer must satisfy all of them simultaneously.
2. Contrapositive application: The correct answer applies the principle in its contrapositive form, requiring you to translate before matching.
For Apply-and-Match: 1. Read the stimulus and diagram the principle(s) as conditional statements. 2. Identify the sufficient and necessary conditions. 3. Determine the contrapositive. 4. For each answer choice, check: Does this case satisfy the sufficient condition? If so, does the answer reach the correct necessary condition? Or: Does this case show the necessary condition absent, and does the answer correctly conclude the sufficient condition is absent? 5. Eliminate answers that reverse, invert, or partially apply the principle. 6. Verify the certainty level of the surviving answer matches the principle.
For Extract-and-Identify: 1. Read the stimulus and identify the key reasoning pattern or decision rule being illustrated. 2. Abstract it: ask "What general rule is being followed here?" 3. Formulate the principle in your own words before looking at answers. 4. Find the answer that matches your formulation. 5. Verify by checking: if I apply this principle to the stimulus facts, do I get the stimulus outcome?
Principle Conform vs. Principle Supporting:
| Principle Conform | Principle Supporting | |—|—| | Stimulus = general principle (or situation illustrating one) | Stimulus = specific argument with conclusion | | Answer = specific situation that matches (or principle that fits) | Answer = general principle that justifies the argument | | Task: match rule to case (or case to rule) | Task: find the rule that makes the case work | | No argument quality evaluation | Evaluates whether the principle would justify the reasoning | | Focus on conditional logic and matching | Focus on bridging the gap |
Principle & Application Skills – Connect abstract rules with specific cases.