Developing Critical Thinking Skills for Watson Glaser and Other Legal Assessments

Why critical thinking matters

Critical thinking is essential in legal practice.

Lawyers must analyse complex information, identify assumptions, evaluate arguments and reach logical conclusions. These skills are required not only in professional settings but also in everyday decision‑making. Critical thinking tests therefore serve as an early indicator of how you will approach real legal problems.

Instead of viewing these assessments as an obstacle, it is helpful to understand their purpose. Law firms use them because legal work demands analytical precision. Treat these tests as preparation for the intellectual challenges that await you in practice.

What critical thinking involves

Critical thinking requires the ability to see the bigger picture, evaluate information objectively and avoid being misled by assumptions or emotional reasoning. It is not simply about intelligence. It is about disciplined thinking, logical structure and the ability to separate fact from inference.

The Watson Glaser and similar assessments test five core skills:

• Inference
• Recognition of assumptions
• Deduction
• Interpretation
• Evaluation of arguments

Each skill reflects a component of legal reasoning. Understanding these categories is the first step towards improving your performance.

Inference

Inference involves concluding evidence. The conclusion is not explicitly stated but implied. You must assess how likely the inference is to be true.

Example

You cannot find your keys or phone, even though you believe you left them on the kitchen table. Possible inferences include:

• A burglar stole them.
• They disappeared due to abnormal physical laws.
• A ghost took them.
• Someone else in the house moved them.
• You left them somewhere else.

The task is to judge how likely each inference is:

• Probably false. A burglary is possible but unlikely.
• Probably false. Abnormal physics is not a plausible explanation.
• Probably false. Ghosts are not a reliable inference.
• Probably true. Someone else may have moved them.
• Probably true. You may have misremembered.

Inference questions require you to assess likelihood, not correctness. This distinction is crucial.

Recognition of assumptions

Assumptions may be explicit or implicit. Critical thinking tests require you to identify implicit assumptions underlying a statement.

Example

“It is vital that we increase public spending on healthcare to keep the population in good health.”

Possible assumptions:

• Public spending on healthcare is too low.
• The population’s health is in decline.
• Better healthcare is needed to keep people healthy.

Assessment:

• Assumption made. The argument implies current spending is insufficient.
• Assumption not made. The statement does not comment on current health levels.
• Assumption made. The argument assumes better healthcare is required.

This skill is central to legal reasoning, where identifying hidden assumptions can determine the strength of an argument.

Deduction

Deduction involves determining whether a conclusion logically follows from given premises. You must ignore external knowledge and rely solely on the information provided.

Example

A library stocks books in Classics, Law, 20th Century History and True Crime. Gemma studies Classics and Psychology.

Possible conclusions:

• Gemma will find all the books she needs.
• Gemma will find some of the books she needs.
• Gemma will not find any useful books.

Assessment:

• Conclusion does not follow. The library does not stock Psychology.
• Conclusion follows. Classics books are available.
• Conclusion does not follow. At least one subject is covered.

Deduction requires strict adherence to the premises, a skill essential in statutory interpretation and case analysis.

Interpretation

Interpretation involves evaluating data and determining what logically follows. This section often includes scientific or numerical information.

Example

Humans hear sounds between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Elephants hear between 17 Hz and 10,500 Hz. Bats produce sounds between 10 kHz and 160 kHz.

Possible conclusions:

• Humans cannot hear most bat noises.
• Humans cannot hear sounds at 15 kHz.
• Elephants hear a wider range of frequencies than humans.

Assessment:

• Conclusion follows. Humans hear up to 20 kHz, so they hear only a small portion of bat sounds.
• Conclusion does not follow. Humans can hear 15 kHz.
• Conclusion does not follow. Humans hear a wider range than elephants.

Interpretation questions test your ability to apply data logically and avoid misreading numerical information.

Evaluation of arguments

Evaluating arguments requires determining whether an argument is strong or weak based on its relevance and logical structure. This section often exposes common logical fallacies.

Example

Should nurses trained in the UK and funded by the NHS be required to work in the public sector before working privately or overseas?

Possible arguments:

• Yes. The NHS funds their training, so they should contribute for a fixed period.
• No. Restricting their employment is equivalent to a work camp.
• Yes. It is unacceptable for taxpayers to fund training only for nurses to leave.

Assessment:

• Strong. It provides a clear, relevant justification.
• Weak. It relies on a false equivalence.
• Weak. It relies on personal incredulity rather than evidence.

Understanding fallacies significantly improves performance in this section.

How to prepare

Critical thinking skills can be developed through practice. These tests are not pure IQ assessments. They measure skills that can be strengthened through repetition and familiarity.

Recommended resources

• JobTestPrep offers tailored practice tests for firms such as Allen & Overy, Hogan Lovells and Linklaters. • YouTube tutorials explain question types and sample answers. • Free online practice tests and courses are widely available. • Books such as Critical Thinking Tests and Critical Thinking Skills provide structured guidance. • Websites dedicated to logical reasoning and fallacies offer additional support.

Regular practice improves speed, accuracy and confidence.

Conclusion

Critical thinking tests are challenging but manageable.

They assess skills that are essential in legal practice and everyday reasoning. With structured preparation, familiarity with question types and consistent practice, you can significantly improve your performance.

Treat these assessments as an opportunity to strengthen your analytical abilities and prepare for the demands of a legal career.