Last Updated on July 10, 2026
By Florian Smeritschnig, former McKinsey Senior Consultant · Updated July 2026
Consulting screens and case interviews reward one habit above almost any other: taking an argument apart and finding the assumption it rests on. That habit is trainable, and free GMAT critical reasoning questions are some of the best free material to train it. The GMAT Focus Edition’s Critical Reasoning builds the exact “what would have to be true for this to hold, and what would break it” reasoning that the BCG Online Case, the Kearney test, and hypothesis-driven casing test.
Key Takeaways
- Free GMAT critical reasoning questions train consulting logic directly. Strengthening, weakening, and finding the assumption in an argument are the same moves you make when you pressure-test a hypothesis in a case.
- The GMAT changed. Since 2024 the only version is the GMAT Focus Edition. Critical Reasoning now sits in the Verbal Reasoning section, which is 23 questions in 45 minutes and includes only Reading Comprehension and Critical Reasoning. Sentence Correction was removed.
- Critical Reasoning tests three things: constructing an argument, evaluating an argument, and evaluating a plan of action. All three map onto consulting problem-solving.
- Use the questions to build the skill, not to rehearse the format. Consulting screens are case-embedded or chatbot-run, so drill the logic here and prepare your specific test with a firm guide.
- This page gives you six practice questions with full explanations and the current free sources for more.
What GMAT critical reasoning tests in 2026
GMAT Critical Reasoning measures your ability to analyze a short argument and judge what strengthens it, what weakens it, and what it assumes. Each question gives you a compact paragraph and one task, and you have roughly two minutes to reason through it.
If you are working from an older guide, update your picture of the exam. The classic GMAT retired at the start of 2024, and the GMAT Focus Edition is now the only version. Critical Reasoning lives in the Verbal Reasoning section, which was trimmed down: Sentence Correction is gone, so Verbal is now only Reading Comprehension and Critical Reasoning. That change is good news for a consulting applicant, because it means a larger share of the section is the pure logic that transfers to case work.
| GMAT Focus Verbal Reasoning, at a glance | Detail |
|---|---|
| Questions | 23 |
| Time | 45 minutes |
| Pace | About 2 minutes per question |
| Question types | Critical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension |
| Removed in Focus Edition | Sentence Correction |
| Critical Reasoning tasks | Construct an argument, evaluate an argument, evaluate a plan |
Why critical reasoning practice sharpens consulting problem-solving
The through-line between GMAT Critical Reasoning and consulting is argument discipline. A case interview is one long chain of claims: here is my hypothesis, here is the data that would support it, here is what would break it. Critical Reasoning drills that chain in isolation, one argument at a time.
When I was at McKinsey, the reasoning error I saw most often was not bad math. It was accepting a claim without checking what it assumed. A candidate would see revenue rise after a change and conclude the change caused it, never asking what else happened that quarter. Critical Reasoning questions punish exactly that reflex, which is why they are useful practice for anyone facing a consulting screen.
Here is where the skill shows up in the screens you may face.
| Critical Reasoning skill | Where it shows up in consulting |
|---|---|
| Spotting the assumption an argument rests on | Hypothesis-driven case structuring |
| Judging what strengthens or weakens a claim | Logical reasoning items in the BCG Cognitive Test |
| Reasoning under a strict timer | The Kearney recruitment test and other aptitude screens |
| Evaluating a plan of action | The recommendation phase of a case interview |
The same caveat applies as with the quant material: GMAT questions build the skill, but they do not rehearse the format. Use them as your logic gym, then learn your specific test through the consulting assessment tests guide.
The three GMAT critical reasoning question types
Every Critical Reasoning question tests one of three competencies. Knowing which one you are looking at tells you what the correct answer has to do.
- Argument construction. You identify what an argument concludes, what it assumes, or what would most strengthen it. The classic stems are “strengthens,” “the argument assumes,” and “supports the conclusion.”
- Argument evaluation. You judge the logic of an argument, usually by finding what would most weaken it or what evidence would help you assess it. The stems are “weakens,” “casts doubt,” and “would be most useful to know.”
- Formulating and evaluating a plan. You assess whether a proposed course of action will work, which requires spotting the condition the plan depends on.
Free GMAT critical reasoning practice questions with answers
Give yourself about two minutes per question, and decide on your answer before reading the explanation. I have kept the contexts business-flavored, because that is closer to what a consulting screen or case will hand you.
Question 1: Strengthen the argument
A retailer launched a loyalty app, and its revenue rose 12% the next quarter. Management concludes the app caused the increase. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens that conclusion?
A. The company also ran a television ad campaign that quarter.
B. Revenue from customers who installed the app rose 30%, while revenue from customers who did not install it was flat.
C. The app was expensive to develop.
D. A competitor launched a similar app the same quarter.
E. Most customers said they liked the app.
Answer: B. To strengthen a causal claim, you isolate the cause and rule out alternatives. B shows the gain came from app users specifically while non-users stayed flat, which points straight at the app. A and D introduce other possible causes and would weaken the claim; C and E say nothing about what drove revenue. Isolating the driver and ruling out other explanations is the core move of a root-cause case.
Question 2: Weaken the argument
A firm switched to a four-day workweek, and its weekly output held steady despite the lost hours. Executives argue that the shorter week made employees more productive. Which of the following, if true, most weakens that argument?
A. Employees reported feeling less stressed.
B. The firm hired temporary contractors during the trial to cover the lost hours.
C. Other firms have experimented with four-day weeks.
D. The trial ran for three months.
E. Output is measured in units shipped.
Answer: B. If contractors made up the lost hours, then steady output is explained by extra labor rather than higher productivity per employee, which breaks the causal claim. A supports the executives; C, D, and E are neutral. Finding the hidden variable that explains a result is exactly what an interviewer wants when you read a “performance improved after X” exhibit.
Question 3: Find the assumption
A city plans to cut car traffic by making all bus rides free, expecting many drivers to switch to buses. The plan depends on which of the following assumptions?
A. Buses are cheaper to operate than trains.
B. A meaningful number of current car commuters would ride buses if fare were the only barrier.
C. The city has a budget surplus.
D. Free buses will increase total ridership.
E. Drivers dislike sitting in traffic.
Answer: B. The plan only works if fare is what stops drivers and they are willing to switch once it is removed. If the real barrier is speed or routing, free rides change nothing. B is the assumption the plan rests on. D only restates the goal, and the others are not required. Naming what a plan depends on is the same discipline as stating the assumptions behind a recommendation before you build on it.
Question 4: Evaluate the plan
A software company plans to raise profit by cutting its subscription price 10%, betting that lower pricing will attract enough new subscribers to more than offset the cut. Which of the following would be most useful to determine whether the plan will succeed?
A. Whether competitors also plan to cut prices.
B. How many subscribers the company has today.
C. Whether the additional contribution generated by new subscribers will exceed the profit lost from charging existing subscribers a lower price.
D. How much the company spends on marketing.
E. Whether current subscribers are satisfied with the product.
Answer: C. The plan hinges on whether the incremental profit from additional subscribers exceeds the profit lost from lowering the price for the existing subscriber base. That requires understanding both subscriber response to the price cut and the economics of serving additional customers. B, D, and E are background factors, while A may affect the outcome but sits below the core economic question. This is a pricing case in miniature: the interviewer wants you to test whether the incremental volume and contribution generated by the price change outweigh the margin given up.
Question 5: Spot the causal assumption
A survey found that employees in open-plan offices report lower satisfaction than employees in private offices. A manager concludes that open-plan layouts reduce satisfaction. The conclusion depends on assuming which of the following?
A. All employees prefer private offices.
B. The employees in the two office types were otherwise comparable, so layout is the likely difference driving satisfaction.
C. Satisfaction is the most important workplace outcome.
D. Open-plan offices are cheaper to run.
E. The survey was conducted online.
Answer: B. The conclusion treats a correlation as causation, which only holds if the two groups were similar in other respects such as seniority, pay, and industry. Otherwise a hidden difference could be driving the gap. B is the assumption the argument needs. A is too strong, and the rest are irrelevant. Correlation-versus-causation discipline is what keeps you from making a false recommendation off a suggestive chart.
Question 6: Draw a valid conclusion
Every analyst promoted this year exceeded their utilization target. Priya is an analyst who did not exceed her utilization target. Which of the following must be true?
A. Priya was not promoted this year.
B. Priya will be promoted next year.
C. Utilization is the only promotion criterion.
D. Everyone who exceeded their target was promoted.
E. Priya is a weak performer.
Answer: A. If all promoted analysts exceeded their targets, then anyone who did not exceed cannot be among the promoted. That is a valid deduction from the given rule. B, C, D, and E all claim more than the statements support. Reasoning cleanly from given rules to a conclusion that must be true is the discipline that keeps your case recommendations defensible under a partner’s challenge.
Where to get more free GMAT critical reasoning practice
The earlier version of this article pointed to a long list of prep vendors, some of which have since changed or shut down. Here is a cleaner, current set, official source first.
- GMAT Official Starter Kit (free): from GMAC, the maker of the exam. It includes 70 real practice questions across all three sections, including Critical Reasoning, plus two full-length adaptive practice exams. This is the highest-quality free practice available.
- mba.com exam content: the official description of every section and question type, so you always work from the current format.
- GMAT Club Critical Reasoning forum: a large free bank of Critical Reasoning questions with community explanations, sortable by type and difficulty. Ideal for high-volume drilling on strengthen, weaken, and assumption questions.
A note on the old list: Veritas Prep, which the earlier version of this article linked to, discontinued its GMAT service in 2022, so that resource is gone.
How to use critical reasoning practice for consulting tests
Working questions is not the same as building the instinct. Here is the approach I give coaching clients using GMAT material to prepare for a consulting screen.
- Name the conclusion first, every time. Before you look at the answers, state in your own words what the argument is trying to prove. Half of all mistakes come from misreading the conclusion.
- Ask what would break it. For every argument, force yourself to name one thing that would weaken it. That single habit trains the assumption-spotting that consulting screens reward.
- Time yourself. Two minutes per question. Speed under pressure is part of what the screen measures, so practice at test pace, not leisurely pace.
- Convert the skill to structure. Once you can dissect an argument fast, turn it into case-ready structuring. Our comprehensive case interview guide and the consulting assessment tests hub show how this logic drives real cases. Pair this work with our free GMAT quant questions to train the numbers side too.
If you want structured reps on the exact structuring skill this builds, StrategyCase’s structuring and frameworks drills take you from loose logic to MECE structures, and 1-on-1 coaching with Florian gives you targeted feedback on where your reasoning leaks.
Frequently asked questions
Are GMAT critical reasoning questions good practice for consulting interviews?
Yes. Critical Reasoning trains argument evaluation, assumption-spotting, and causal discipline, which are the same skills a case interview and screens like the BCG Online Case test or the Bain SOVA and TestGorilla. Use the questions to build the reasoning habit, then rehearse your specific test’s format separately.
Do consulting firms use critical reasoning tests?
Indirectly, yes. Firms rarely run a standalone “critical reasoning test,” but the logical reasoning inside the BCG Cognitive Test, the Kearney recruitment test, and the reasoning demanded by the BCG Online Case all draw on the same skill GMAT Critical Reasoning trains.
What is GMAT critical reasoning in 2026?
On the current GMAT Focus Edition, Critical Reasoning is part of the Verbal Reasoning section, which is 23 questions in 45 minutes and now contains only Critical Reasoning and Reading Comprehension. Sentence Correction was removed. Critical Reasoning tests argument construction, argument evaluation, and plan evaluation.
How is GMAT critical reasoning different from a case interview?
A Critical Reasoning question hands you a finished argument and asks you to judge it. A case interview asks you to build the argument yourself, gather data, and defend a recommendation. Critical Reasoning trains the judgment half of that skill, which is why it is useful preparation but not a full substitute for case practice.
How long should I practice critical reasoning for a consulting screen?
If your goal is a consulting test rather than a real GMAT, two to three weeks of daily timed sets is usually enough to make the strengthen, weaken, and assumption patterns automatic. Review every miss to find whether you misread the conclusion or missed the assumption.
Is there free official GMAT practice?
Yes. The GMAT Official Starter Kit from mba.com is free and includes 70 real questions, Critical Reasoning among them, plus two full-length adaptive practice exams that use the same scoring as the real test.
Related guides
- Consulting assessment tests maps every firm’s online screen and what each one tests.
- The complete case interview guide shows how argument logic drives a real case.
- The BCG Cognitive Test breaks down BCG’s numerical and logical screen.
- The Kearney recruitment test covers a demanding verbal and logical aptitude screen.
- The BCG Sova article and Bain TestGorilla article cover it’s assessments.
- Free GMAT quant questions trains the numbers side of the same skill set.
The bottom line
Free GMAT critical reasoning questions are an underused source of consulting practice. They drill the argument discipline, the assumption-spotting, and the correlation-versus-causation care that firms screen for, and there is a large bank of free, well-explained material to work through. Build the reasoning here, then turn it into structure and rehearse your specific test with a firm guide.
When you are ready to turn sharp logic into a consulting offer, start with StrategyCase’s Case Interview Academy.
Written by Florian Smeritschnig, founder of StrategyCase.com and a former McKinsey Senior Consultant who evaluated candidates at the firm and has since delivered 2,200+ mock interviews and coaching sessions, helping 700+ candidates secure offers at McKinsey, BCG, Bain, and other top firms.
