Must Be questions—also known as Must Be True (MBT) and Must Be False (MBF)—ask us to make inferences based on the passage. In other words, to find what else must be the case based on the available information.
They tend to look like this:
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred?
- If the columnist's statements are true, then which one of the following must also be true?
- If the statements are true, which one of the following cannot be true?
Sometimes, you'll get a list of facts that point to something else when strung together. Be careful. It's easy to fall into the on these questions. Stick to the passage alone.
Other times, these play out like mini Logic Games, hitting you with wordy conditional logic you need to tease apart.
In either case, the method's the same. Consider each fact or condition on its own merits, tying it into the others as you go.
Examples
PrepTest 135, Section 4, Question 18
Check out
Hospitals, universities, labor unions, and other institutions may well have public purposes and be quite successful at achieving them even though each of their individual staff members does what he or she does only for selfish reasons.
This one starts off by introducing two groups: institutions and their staff members.
The author tells us that institution staffers do things for selfish reasons, but despite that, the institutions themselves may have and achieve public purposes. From this we can infer that institutions aren’t the sum of their parts.
Answer choice B’s a dead ringer: “An organization (institutions) can have a property (public purpose) that not all of its members possess (they’re self-interested).”
PrepTest 123, Section 3, Question 22
Next, we're looking at
If the price it pays for coffee beans continues to increase, the Coffee Shoppe will have to increase its prices. In that case, either the Coffee Shoppe will begin selling noncoffee products or its coffee sales will decrease. But selling noncoffee products will decrease the Coffee Shoppe's overall profitability. Moreover, the Coffee Shoppe can avoid a decrease in overall profitability only if its coffee sales do not decrease.
This one's a mouthful of conditional logic. Take it one step at a time.
First condition: If bean prices go up, then shop prices go up. Simple enough.
Second condition: If shop prices go up, then either it will start selling noncoffee products or its coffee sales will decrease. We can string this together with the first sentence. If bean prices go up, then the shop will either sell noncoffee products or lose some coffee sales.
Third condition: If the shop sells noncoffee products, then its overall profitability will decrease. This ties all the way back to the very first condition and accounts for one of the two possible paths presented in the second condition. In other words, if bean prices go up, and the shop goes the noncoffee product route, its overall profitability will go down.
Fourth condition: If the shop avoids a decrease in overall profitability, then its coffee sales do not decrease. This means if we lose coffee sales, profits will drop. Like the third condition, this fourth one ties all the way back to the first. If bean prices go up, therefore shop prices go up, and the shop elects not to sell noncoffee products, then coffee sales go down, resulting in lost profits.
Sounds like our coffee shop is pretty screwed if bean prices go up—all paths lead to lower overall profitability. That's what must be true.
Really, any of the teased apart conditions could constitute something that must be true. We're completely prepared, no matter what the answer choices throw our way.
---
That's it for the LR version of Must Be True. Next, we're tackling Most Strongly Supported questions.