3.2: Critical Reading: Inferences, Definitions in Context, and True/False Logic

Beyond simple fact extraction, the NPOST will test your ability to read critically. This involves reading between the lines to draw logical conclusions, figuring out the meaning of unfamiliar words based on how they are used, and evaluating statements based on a strict standard of evidence. These skills are essential for police work, where you must interpret witness statements, analyze complex situations, and ensure your reports are logically sound.

Making Valid Inferences

An inference is a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning. On the reading comprehension section, an inference is a statement that must be true based on the provided text, even if it is not explicitly stated. It is the logical next step.

The most common mistake candidates make is confusing a valid inference with a reasonable assumption. A reasonable assumption is something that might be true or is likely true in the real world, but cannot be proven by the text alone. A valid inference is locked in by the text.

Example Text: Officer Jones arrived at the scene of the burglary at 2200 hours. The front door was ajar, and the lock was visibly broken. Jones noted muddy footprints leading from the doorway to the safe in the back office. The safe was empty. It had rained heavily between 1800 and 2000 hours, but the rain had stopped completely before Jones arrived.

• Statement A: The burglary occurred between 1800 and 2200 hours.
• Statement B: The burglar stole money from the safe.
• Statement C: The burglar was wearing boots.

Let's analyze these statements:

• Statement A is a valid inference. The footprints were muddy, implying they were made during or after the rain (which started at 1800). Officer Jones arrived at 2200. Therefore, the burglary must have happened within that window. This must be true based on the text.
• Statement B is a reasonable assumption, but an invalid inference. We know the safe was empty, but the text never states what was originally inside it. It could have held documents, jewelry, or nothing at all. Therefore, we cannot infer that money was stolen based strictly on the text.
• Statement C is an invalid inference. We know there were footprints, but we don't know what kind of footwear made them. They could be sneakers or dress shoes. The text lacks the evidence to support this claim.

When asked to make an inference, look for the answer choice that is undeniably supported by combining two or more pieces of information from the passage.

Defining Vocabulary in Context

The exam may present you with an unfamiliar word or a common word used in a specific, perhaps legal, way and ask you for its meaning. You should not rely solely on your vocabulary knowledge; instead, use context clues. The surrounding words and sentences are designed to point you toward the correct definition.

There are several types of context clues:

1. Restatement or Synonym Clues: The author may use a difficult word and then immediately explain it using simpler language. For example: 'The suspect exhibited bellicose behavior, acting aggressively and trying to start fights with the officers.' The phrase 'acting aggressively' defines 'bellicose.'
2. Contrast or Antonym Clues: The author may use a word that means the opposite of the unfamiliar word. Look for signal words like but, however, although, on the other hand. For example: 'Although the witness was usually loquacious, she was surprisingly silent during the interrogation.' The contrast with 'silent' tells you 'loquacious' means talkative.
3. Example Clues: The author provides examples that illustrate the meaning of the word. For example: 'The detective discovered contraband in the vehicle, including illegal narcotics and unregistered firearms.' The examples define 'contraband' as illegal goods.
4. Inference Clues: You must deduce the meaning based on the overall context of the sentence or paragraph. For example: 'Given the suspect's proximity to the crime scene and his matching description, the officer felt he had sufficient grounds to detain him.' You can infer that 'proximity' means closeness.

True/False/Cannot Determine Logic

A specific type of question asks you to evaluate a statement as True, False, or Cannot Determine based on the passage. This requires a very strict application of logic.

• True: The statement is explicitly stated in the text OR is a valid inference that undeniably must be true based on the text.
• False: The statement directly contradicts information explicitly stated in the text or contradicts a valid inference.
• Cannot Determine: The text does not provide enough information to prove the statement is definitively True or definitively False. It might be true, it might be false, but the text is silent on the matter.

Example Text: All patrol vehicles must be inspected at the beginning of each shift. Officers must check the tire pressure, oil levels, and siren functionality. If a vehicle fails inspection, the officer must report it to the fleet manager immediately and use a spare vehicle. Officer Smith inspected Vehicle 104 at 0700 hours and found the siren was malfunctioning. He immediately notified the fleet manager.

• Statement 1: Officer Smith checked the tire pressure on Vehicle 104. -> True. The text says all vehicles must be inspected, and an inspection includes checking tire pressure. Since Smith inspected the vehicle, he must have checked the tire pressure.
• Statement 2: Officer Smith drove a spare vehicle for his shift. -> True. The text says if a vehicle fails inspection (which it did, due to the siren), the officer must use a spare vehicle.
• Statement 3: The fleet manager repaired the siren on Vehicle 104 before the next shift. -> Cannot Determine. The text tells us Smith notified the manager, but it provides no information about what the manager did afterward. We cannot assume the repair happened.
• Statement 4: Officer Smith inspected Vehicle 104 at the end of his shift. -> False. The text explicitly states the inspection happens at the beginning of the shift, and Smith did his at 0700.

The 'Cannot Determine' option is a trap for candidates who rely on their imagination rather than the text. If you find yourself thinking 'Well, they probably did X,' you are likely looking at a 'Cannot Determine' statement.