Statement & Conclusion
🔒 Log in to trackJudge what a short statement definitely supports: conclusions (forced or clearly implied by the statement alone), assumptions (what the speaker must take for granted — use the negation test) and courses of action (practical, proportionate responses). The traps are predictable: extreme words, outside facts, overgeneralisation, averages read as limits, and 'only X are eligible' misread as a guarantee.
One page per subtopic: detailed notes, every question type, formulas, tricks and practice sets.
Every formula on one printable page, grouped by subtopic.
4 exam-level questions worked step by step.
46 questions — untimed practice or a timed test with analysis.
Track record in the exam
Questions per shift in recent SSC CGL papers.
Test difficulty mix (46 questions)
Question patterns exams keep repeating
Taken from previous-year papers. If a pattern is marked "very common", expect to see it in your exam.
Two conclusions (verbal)
very commonA notice, news line or fact followed by two conclusions I and II.
How to solve: Judge each conclusion only against the statement. Reject new extreme words, wider scope, outside causes and future guesses. Keep restatements and clear, soft implications.
Example: Statement: Sales of phones rose sharply in October this year. Conclusions: I. Every year phone sales rise in festival months. II. Phone prices were cut in October.
I overgeneralises one year; II adds an unstated cause. Neither follows.
Data-based statement
commonThe statement carries numbers — prices, marks, distances, averages.
How to solve: Do the arithmetic the conclusion claims. Percentages are on the old value; average × count = total; an average never fixes a maximum; sales are not profit.
Example: Statement: A notebook rose from ₹40 to ₹50 and a pen from ₹10 to ₹15. Conclusion: The notebook price rose by a larger percentage.
Notebook 25%, pen 50% → does not follow.
Only-X eligibility trap
common'Only those who…' or 'every… who…' with a named person.
How to solve: 'Only X' is a gate: non-X are out, X are not guaranteed. 'Every X' is a guarantee: each X gets it. Read the person against the correct direction.
Example: Statement: Only employees with ten years' service are eligible for an award. Rekha has twelve years. Conclusion: Rekha will receive the award.
Ten years is necessary, not sufficient → does not follow.
Three conclusions
occasionalThree conclusions; options list pairs or all three.
How to solve: Judge each conclusion separately, write ✓ or ✗ beside it, then match the pattern of ticks to the options.
Example: Statement: A flyover cut travel time from 40 to 15 minutes. I. Time fell by 25 minutes. II. The flyover was costly. III. Commuters save time.
I ✓ (arithmetic), II ✗ (not mentioned), III ✓ → only I and III.
Statement and assumption
commonAdvice, notice, advertisement or decision with two assumptions.
How to solve: Use the negation test: negate the assumption; if the statement becomes pointless, it is implicit. Reject total effects, rival comparisons and contradictions.
Example: Statement: 'Book tickets early to avoid the rush.' Assumption: There is likely to be a rush.
Negate: no rush → the advice is pointless → implicit.
Decision / policy assumption
commonA government or company decision followed by assumptions about need and feasibility.
How to solve: A decision assumes a need exists and that the step can be carried out. It does not assume total success or unrelated extra steps.
Example: Statement: Two extra coaches will be added to a train in the festival season. Assumption: The train can run with two extra coaches.
Negate: it cannot → the decision is impossible → implicit.
Course of action
commonA problem is described; two or three proposed actions.
How to solve: Keep practical, proportionate and related steps — investigate, repair, relieve, regulate, act as per rules. Reject bans, permanent shutdowns, collective punishment and unrelated steps.
Example: Statement: Several hostel students fell ill after dinner. Actions: I. Test the food and inspect the kitchen. II. Shut the hostel permanently.
I is proportionate; II is an overreaction → only I.
Relief plus prevention
occasionalA crisis with one immediate-relief action and one long-term preventive action.
How to solve: Both types are valid and do not cancel each other. Reject only the third, absurd option if there is one.
Example: Statement: Dengue cases have risen sharply. Actions: I. Fogging and removal of stagnant water. II. Hospitals keep extra beds ready.
Prevention and relief → both follow.