Study on the flyACTReading › Inferences and logical conclusions

ReadingFree

Inferences and logical conclusions — ACT practice questions

On the ACT Reading test, Inferences and logical conclusions items ask you to decide what a passage most strongly suggests rather than what it states outright. You must combine details, sometimes from paired passages, and pick the claim that follows from the text without going beyond it. Stems often say it can reasonably be inferred, most strongly suggest, or most nearly suggests, and they may ask how an author would view a result or what both writers believe. Answer choices are complete claims about motive, attitude, or shared belief. Traps include options that are too broad, that rest on one image, or that mix up the authors.

  • Section: Reading 36 questions on the paper
  • 100 practice questions in the app

Sample questions

What Calls an Oyster Home?

NATURAL SCIENCE: Passage A and Passage B both address the topic of “What Calls an Oyster Home?.”
Along the coast of North Carolina, oyster
restoration crews often begin with
low ridges of cleaned shells. The shells
5
provide hard surfaces on which young
oysters, called spat, can fasten. Marine
ecologist Lena Ortiz wondered whether a
healthy reef also announces itself through
sound.
 
10
An oyster larva drifts for days or weeks
before it must cement itself to a hard
surface or die. Chemical traces from adult
oysters help, Ortiz notes, but they fade
quickly in moving water. Sound, by
15
contrast, can travel farther than a plume
of scent, which is why she suspected that
a noisy reef might function as a beacon.
 
Ortiz’s team lowered waterproof
microphones beside mature reefs, newly
20
built shell ridges, and bare mudflats.
Mature reefs were dense with
snapping-shrimp cracks and fish grunts;
new ridges and mudflats were quieter. In
laboratory channels, oyster larvae swam
25
downward more often to mature-reef
recordings than to mudflat recordings, the
behavior that brings a larva to a surface
where it can attach.
 
The team placed speakers beside six new
30
shell ridges: three broadcast mature-reef
sounds each evening for two weeks, and
three had silent speakers. Settlement
plates near the playback ridges collected
about 60 percent more spat. Ortiz did not
35
call sound a substitute for habitat.
Larvae given reef sounds over smooth
laboratory trays had nowhere secure to
attach and often drifted away. In the
field, extra settlers did not
40
automatically become adults; summer heat
and sediment affected survival at both
playback and silent ridges.
 
Before deploying the speakers, the team
set every unit to the same measured level,
45
aimed it toward the incoming tide, and
exchanged active and silent equipment
between ridges so a sheltered site would
not always belong to one treatment.
Divers inspected the settlement plates without
50
knowing which sound condition each ridge
had received. These precautions reduced
simpler explanations for the difference in
spat counts. Most of the added settlement
followed calm evenings, when recordings
55
carried farther than they did in rough
water. Ortiz says crews might avoid
wasting battery power by using short
windows of favorable weather rather than
broadcasting continuously.
 
60
Still, Ortiz sees sound as a potentially
useful nudge that might shorten the wait
for larvae at reefs crews have already
built. She compares the method to lighting
a porch for guests who already mean to
65
visit: helpful if the house is sturdy,
useless if the floor is about to give way.
The idea is not to make an artificial reef
sound busy forever, she says, but to help
a quiet new reef begin producing its own
70
chorus.

Question 1

Taken together, the matched speaker levels, the exchange of active and silent equipment, and the divers’ uninformed plate inspections in Passage A most strongly suggest that Ortiz’s team wanted to:

  1. Acopy every acoustic feature of a mature reef, including its fish and shrimp
  2. Bshow that silent speakers increase survival more than playback does
  3. Ckeep recordings from traveling on calm evenings
  4. Dprevent ridge location or observer expectation from accounting for the extra spat
Show answer

Answer: D — prevent ridge location or observer expectation from accounting for the extra spat

The team set every speaker to the same measured level, swapped active and silent units so a sheltered site would not always receive one treatment, and had divers inspect plates without knowing the sound condition. Together those steps limit confounds, so a difference in spat is more credibly tied to playback.

Question 2

It can reasonably be inferred that Bell would view a two-week spat count as:

  1. Auseful evidence of initial settlement but insufficient evidence of restoration success.
  2. Ba better measure of reef health than survival after several seasons.
  3. Cproof that sound is the strongest cue in every bay.
  4. Dirrelevant unless the reef contains mature snapping shrimp.
Show answer

Answer: A — useful evidence of initial settlement but insufficient evidence of restoration success.

Bell accepts that playback can demonstrate a response, but he explicitly distinguishes a short settlement count from long-term survival and persistence.

Question 3

Ortiz’s comparison of acoustic playback to lighting a porch for guests, together with Bell’s concluding remarks, most nearly suggests that both authors believe reef sound:

  1. Aincreases early settlement enough that both authors would treat a two-week spat count as restoration success
  2. Bcan help larvae find a reef that is already structurally sound, but cannot make an unsound reef livable
  3. Cgives well-built reefs an early advantage that both authors already regard as a verdict after one noisy summer
  4. Dhelps a quiet new reef begin producing its own chorus, which both authors equate with preventing the reef from sinking
Show answer

Answer: B — can help larvae find a reef that is already structurally sound, but cannot make an unsound reef livable

The porch light helps guests who already mean to visit if the house is sturdy, and is useless if the floor is about to give way. Bell’s closing line makes the same limit explicit: a broadcast can invite larvae but cannot keep the reef from sinking. Both authors therefore treat sound as a way to attract larvae to adequate structure, not as a stand-in for long-term success, a one-summer verdict, or a chorus that keeps a reef from sinking.

Practice 100 Inferences and logical conclusions questions in the app

More ACT topics

Everything on the ACT