Reading comprehension consists of reading and comprehension.
"Reading" entails familiarity with vocabulary and the capability to process written material rapidly.
"Comprehension" refers to grasping, interpreting, and understanding written text accurately.
Limited reading speed affects performance, especially under exam time constraints.
Retention and understanding are believed to improve with increased reading speed.
Reading speed is measured in words per minute (WPM).
Reading speed can be assessed by dividing the passage word count by time taken (in seconds) and multiplying by 60.
A target reading speed for competitive exams is suggested to be at least 250 WPM.
Speed readers can read at rates exceeding 4,200 or even 20,000 WPM with high retention, as seen in notable competitions.
Practice with digital tools and reading apps is encouraged for improvement.
Earlier, passages were large (1200–1500 words) with multiple questions per passage.
Recent patterns show shorter passages (150–250 words), usually with a single accompanying question.
Shorter passages allow candidates to skip difficult content with minimal penalty.
Passages are commonly extracted from popular texts, books, research papers, committee recommendations, and reputed newspapers.
Thematic fields overlap with general studies but answers must always adhere to the content of the passage only.
Use of outside knowledge is discouraged unless it is explicitly mentioned in the passage.
Direct or Factual: Can be answered by locating explicit information.
Inference-Based: Require deducing implicit meaning or logical conclusions.
Assumption-Based: Involve identifying unstated, underlying premises necessary for an argument.
Main Idea/Theme-Based: Demand identification of the passage’s central concept or message.
Focus answers exclusively on evidence from the passage, not external knowledge.
Passage language must guide responses, especially for inferential questions.
An argument typically includes premises (facts), assumptions (unstated premises), and conclusions.
Visualize as a tree: stem = premise, roots = assumption, leaves/branches = conclusion.
Premises have independent existence; they can stand alone as facts.
The conclusion is dependent; it does not exist independently and must be based on premises.
Signal words indicate premises or conclusions; e.g., “therefore” typically introduces a conclusion.
Assumptions bridge the gap between premises and conclusions, supplying necessary but unstated information.
For example:
Premise: “Mohan came to class in a BMW.”
Conclusion: “Therefore, he must be from a rich family.”
Assumption: “People using BMW must be rich.”
Evaluating assumptions includes checking if external information strengthens, weakens, or is irrelevant (scope trap) to the argument.
If P occurs, Q must occur.
Contrapositive: If Q does not occur, P did not occur.
However, if Q occurs, it does not necessarily mean P has occurred.
Example: "If someone is hardworking, they will become an IAS officer." If someone is an IAS officer, they may or may not be hardworking (per the structure, not real-life).
Q will happen only if P happens; highlighting the necessity of P for Q.
Contrapositive: If Q has occurred, P must have occurred.
Example: "I use an umbrella only if it rains." If using an umbrella, it’s necessarily raining. If it’s raining, I may or may not be using an umbrella.
At least one of P or Q must occur.
If P does not occur, Q must occur; and vice versa.
Both may occur simultaneously, but at least one is certain.
If P, then Q and R: P ensures that both Q and R happen; absence of one or both implies P didn’t occur.
If P, then Q or R: At least one must happen if P occurs; if neither happens, then P did not occur.
Words such as “all”, “everyone”, “always”, “never”, “only”, and similar absolutes are often incorrect options unless strongly supported.
For example, “every winter”, “completely”, “entirely”, “totally”, etc., require robust textual evidence.
Options may introduce ideas, perspectives, or actors absent from the passage.
For instance, references to parents’ wishes when not mentioned in the passage are scope traps.
Such options must be eliminated.
Options that compare elements not compared in the passage are invalid.
If both reading and outdoor activities are mentioned, but no explicit preference is given, preference claims are incorrect.
Options may manipulate similar terms but in a different context (e.g., “malnutrition” vs “hunger”).
Always verify that the context matches the claim.
If the passage addresses multiple aspects (like problem and solution or pros and cons), options depicting only one aspect are usually incorrect.
Example 1: Activity and Extreme Statements
If the passage says, “Harry attended a camp this year and last year,” inferring “Harry goes every year” is an extreme assumption not supported by the text.
Example 2: Interpreting Given Information
If the passage describes narwhals’ decline over the last 5 years, projecting the same trend for subsequent years is speculative unless stated.
Example 3: Scope and Reason
Stating that fishing bans will increase narwhal population is unfounded if no cause for the decline is mentioned.
Example 4: Wordplay
If toxic fruits are mentioned, do not conflate toxicity with a separate compound extracted from the same tree unless specifically linked.
Example 5: Cause and Effect
“If there are strong patent laws, there will be innovation.” The reverse is not implied unless explicitly stated.
The inclusion of an additional beneficiary (like financial institutions not mentioned) is a scope trap.
For "If P, then Q," two valid derived statements:
If not Q, then not P (contrapositive).
If P occurs, then Q definitely occurs.
For "Either P or Q":
Not P implies Q; not Q implies P.
Associative structures extend to cases with more variables, using “and”/“or” logic.
“If people do not wear masks, the virus will spread”: If the virus did not spread, people must have worn masks.
“Whenever I want to work, there is no internet”: If there is internet, then I do not want to work.
“If I eat samosa, it will rain”: If it rained, it is not certain if samosa was eaten; however, if I ate samosa, rain is certain.
“If the lockdown is announced, the match will not be played”: If the match is played, then the lockdown was not announced.
Strengthening: Additional details support or validate the passage’s argument.
Weakening: New information counters or undermines the passage’s claim.
Irrelevant (Scope Trap): Details introduced are extraneous and not linked to the core argument.
Do not be influenced by outside knowledge or assumptions.
Avoid committing to the first plausible option; always consider all choices.
Eliminate options swiftly if there is explicit textual evidence of extremity, irrelevance, or miscomparison.
Prefer options that best align with the explicit passage content.
In cause-and-effect structures, carefully distinguish between “if–then” and “only if–then” forms.
Premises: “All men are mortal”; “Socrates is a man”
Conclusion: “Socrates is mortal”
Represented via a Venn diagram: men as a subset of mortals; Socrates is a member of men.
Compound conditionals: “If I go to my hometown, then I will visit my grandfather and farmhouse.”
For compound and (“If P then Q and R”): Not Q or not R implies not P.
For compound or (“If P then Q or R”): If both Q and R do not occur, then P cannot have occurred.
Understanding how a negated outcome (not Q) leads to the negation of its antecedent (not P).
Identifying when events are independent, dependent, or mutually exclusive based on the textual structure.
Sequential logic (if one person does not attend, another must).
Chains of deduction (if A, then B; if B, then C).
Mutual exclusivity and dependency in event participation.
Assumption-based questions in detail.
Theory and practice of identifying assumptions within passages.