Question 1

Analogy — Colour : Eyes Choose the pair that preserves “stimulus/percept : sense organ.”

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: “Colour : Eyes” relates a perceptual stimulus (colour/light) to the sense organ that detects it (eyes). We must select another stimulus–organ pairing. Given Data / Assumptions: Eyes detect colour/light. The correct pair should be “stimulus” → “organ that senses it.” Concept / Approach: Eliminate pairs involving tools (spectacles), media (newspaper), or treatments (medicine). Retain the biological sense relation. Step-by-Step Solution: “Fragrance : Nose” — smell (fragrance/odour) is detected by the nose; perfect parallel.“Vision : Spectacles” — spectacles are instruments, not organs.“Print : Newspaper” — content–container, not sensory mapping.“Medicine : Ailment” — remedy–illness, not perception. Verification / Alternative check: Five-senses mapping confirms sight–eyes, smell–nose, taste–tongue, touch–skin, hearing–ears; “fragrance : nose” fits the pattern. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Vision : Spectacles — device, not organ. Print : Newspaper — medium, not sensory stimulus. Medicine : Ailment — therapeutic, not perceptual. Common Pitfalls: Picking an instrument (spectacles) rather than the biological organ. Final Answer: Fragrance : Nose

Question 2

Analogy — Music : Notes Select the pair that preserves “discipline/content unit” relation.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: “Music : Notes” links a field to its fundamental symbolic units. We need a similar mapping where the right term denotes basic elements used within the left field. Given Data / Assumptions: Notes are the atomic symbols composing music (notation, melody). Numbers are the atomic symbols composing mathematics (quantities, operations). Concept / Approach: Reject pairs that mix medium with art (dance : music), institution with members (nations : UN), or tool with purpose (language : communication). Choose a field → units relation. Step-by-Step Solution: “Mathematics : Numbers” — canonical field–unit mapping.“Dance : Music” — different arts; music accompanies dance but is not the unit of dance.“Language : Communication” — function, not unit.“Nations : UN” — members → body; reversed granularity. Verification / Alternative check: Textbooks frame music in notes and mathematics in numbers; the analogy pattern is standard. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Dance : Music — accompaniment, not elemental unit. Language : Communication — purpose, not building blocks. Nations : UN — organization membership, not content units. Common Pitfalls: Confusing function or accompaniment with elemental composition. Final Answer: Mathematics : Numbers

Question 3

Analogy — Comets : Meteors Choose the option that maintains “class : related members/phenomena” with correct taxonomy.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The pair “Comets : Meteors” parallels two distinct but related astronomical phenomena, not a class–member relation in a strict taxonomic sense. We must identify an option that mirrors an appropriate relation (closely related phenomena), or else conclude none fits adequately. Given Data / Assumptions: Comets and meteors are both celestial phenomena, but one is not the class of the other. We look for similarly paired, non-taxonomic but related natural phenomena. Concept / Approach: Test each option for parallel structure (two peer phenomena of the same domain) rather than cause/effect, container/content, or attribute/behavior mismatches. Step-by-Step Evaluation: Books : Knowledge — object vs abstract content; not peer phenomena.Hawk : Crow — two birds (peers) but at species level; acceptable shape but domain is zoology not phenomena; the original pair are phenomena, not taxa.Stars : Fortune — idiomatic/astrology; not scientific peer phenomena.Reptiles : Crawl — class vs behavior; category mismatch. Verification / Alternative check: Since none captures “two peer natural phenomena” within the same scientific domain (like “earthquakes : volcanoes”), the best choice is “None of these.” Why Other Options Are Wrong: Books : Knowledge — container–content. Hawk : Crow — two species; the original are event/phenomena types. Stars : Fortune — metaphorical/astrology. Reptiles : Crawl — class–behavior mismatch. Common Pitfalls: Accepting any two related nouns without checking relational parity (phenomenon ↔ phenomenon). Final Answer: None of these

Question 4

Analogy — Lotus Temple : Delhi Select the pair that correctly maps landmark → city (with proper spellings).

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This analogy maps a famous landmark to the city it is associated with. “Lotus Temple : Delhi” is correct. We must pick another correct landmark–city pair (spelling normalized). Given Data / Assumptions: Lotus Temple is in New Delhi. Correct associations: Charminar → Hyderabad; Hawa Mahal → Jaipur; Jama Masjid (Delhi), not Patna; Amarnath cave → Jammu & Kashmir, not Ahmedabad. Concept / Approach: Validate geographic correctness and correct spellings to avoid traps. Step-by-Step Solution: “Char Minar : Hyderabad” — historically and geographically correct (Charminar in Hyderabad).“Jama Masjid : Patna” — incorrect; the iconic Jama Masjid is in Delhi.“Hawa Mahal : Kolkata” — incorrect; Hawa Mahal is in Jaipur.“Amarnath Cave : Ahmedabad” — incorrect; Amarnath is a shrine in Jammu & Kashmir. Verification / Alternative check: Standard Indian geography confirms Charminar–Hyderabad pairing. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Jama Masjid : Patna — wrong city. Hawa Mahal : Kolkata — wrong city. Amarnath Cave : Ahmedabad — wrong state/city. Common Pitfalls: Overlooking common mix-ups in landmark locations. Final Answer: Char Minar : Hyderabad

Question 5

Analogy — Disobedience : Punishment Choose the pair that mirrors the cause–effect relation, where an action or quality naturally invites a corresponding consequence.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In verbal analogies, we look for the underlying relation connecting the first pair and then select the option that preserves the same relation. The pair “Disobedience : Punishment” represents a cause–effect pattern. An instance of disobedience typically warrants a consequence in the form of punishment. Our task is to find another pair in which the first term characteristically leads to, merits, or brings about the second term. Given Data / Assumptions: The left term should be a behavior or quality. The right term should be the socially expected or conventional consequence. The relation should be normative and recognizable, not merely possible. Concept / Approach: We identify which option shows a widely accepted linkage from quality to consequence. We reject pairs that show no stable linkage, only a loose association, or mismatched categories. The closer the social convention behind the effect, the better the fit with the stimulus–response nature of the stem pair. Step-by-Step Solution: Map the stem: Disobedience (cause) customarily results in Punishment (effect).Test “Bravery : Appreciation” — acts of bravery are commonly applauded; appreciation is a fitting social response.Test “Prayer : Salvation” — theological and conditional, not a general secular certainty.Test “Patience : Listening” — patience is a trait; listening is an activity, not a standard consequence of patience.Test “Teenager : Dynamic” — category mismatch and not a cause–effect relation. Verification / Alternative check: In social and moral contexts, brave deeds regularly receive appreciation, awards, or praise. This mirrors the predictability of disobedience drawing punishment, preserving a symmetrical cause–effect design across positive and negative domains. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Prayer : Salvation — relies on faith tradition and conditions; not a general or guaranteed consequence. Patience : Listening — correlation is weak and nonconsequential; listening does not automatically follow patience. Teenager : Dynamic — attribute assignment, not consequence. Common Pitfalls: Confusing mere association with a normative consequence; overlooking that the stem describes a widely expected response to a behavior. Final Answer: Bravery : Appreciation

Question 6

Analogy — Dearth : Surplus Choose the option that preserves the same clear antonym relationship.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Analogies often test antonyms. “Dearth : Surplus” is a textbook opposite pair: dearth means scarcity or shortage, while surplus means excess or abundance. To match this, we need another pair in which the two words stand in a direct, widely accepted opposite relationship. Given Data / Assumptions: Dearth and surplus are opposites in quantity. The correct option must present clear, nonambiguous lexical opposites, not loose contraries or associations. Part-of-speech and semantic domains should align to avoid category errors. Concept / Approach: Filter options by strict antonymy. Reject pairs where the relation is cause–effect, degree, synonymy, or metaphor. Prefer crisp dictionary-level opposites comparable to dearth vs surplus. Step-by-Step Solution: Evaluate “Simple : Complicated” — accepted antonyms (easy vs complex).“True : Unbelievable” — not antonyms; “unbelievable” signals surprising, not necessarily false.“Touch : Repulsion” — verb vs noun; repulsion is an aversion, not the antonym of touch.“Dream : Fantasy” — near synonyms, not opposites. Verification / Alternative check: “Simple” and “complicated” are presented in learner dictionaries as antonyms across domains (problems, explanations, designs), paralleling dearth vs surplus as clean contraries. Why Other Options Are Wrong: True : Unbelievable — category and logic mismatch; false is the direct antonym of true. Touch : Repulsion — not antonyms; mixing action and disposition. Dream : Fantasy — both denote imagined states; they align semantically rather than oppose. Common Pitfalls: Choosing contraries that are not strict opposites or mixing categories (noun vs verb) that muddy the analogy. Final Answer: Simple : Complicated

Question 7

Analogy — Buddhists : Pagoda Select the pair that correctly maps a faith community to its traditional place of worship.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: “Buddhists : Pagoda” links a religious community to a customary worship structure. An apt parallel must likewise pair a community with its established place of worship, not with a symbol, deity, festival, or generic term that fails to capture the specific institution. Given Data / Assumptions: Buddhists are associated with pagodas (among other structures like viharas or stupas). We need a similarly precise mapping for another community. Entries that name a symbol or misattribute a location should be rejected. Concept / Approach: Check each option for accuracy and type consistency: community → worship place. Discard symbol-based or incorrect geography-based responses. Step-by-Step Solution: “Jews : Synagogue” — accurate and specific; synagogue is the Jewish house of worship.“Parsis : Temple” — Parsis worship in fire temples (Agiary or Atash Behram); “temple” is too generic and misses the distinctive qualifier.“Christians : Cross” — cross is a symbol, not a place.“Jains : Sun Temple” — the Sun Temple is a specific Hindu temple; Jains worship in derasars or Jain temples. Verification / Alternative check: Standard religious studies references confirm synagogue as the Jewish place of worship, parallel to pagoda for Buddhists in various regions. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Parsis : Temple — lacks the defining “fire” and the specific Parsi terms. Christians : Cross — symbol instead of location. Jains : Sun Temple — wrong tradition and specificity. Common Pitfalls: Accepting generic or symbolic terms where a proper architectural or institutional term is required. Final Answer: Jews : Synagogue

Question 8

Analogy — Suggestion : Order Pick the option that preserves a graded intensity relation (weaker form to stronger form) within the same domain.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The pair “Suggestion : Order” demonstrates a gradation of force within directives: a suggestion is a mild, optional prompt, whereas an order is a strong, mandatory directive. The correct analogous pair should likewise move from a milder instance to a stronger instance within the same semantic field. Given Data / Assumptions: The relation is not antonymy or cause–effect but degree/intensity within a category. Both terms should belong to the same type (e.g., both directives, both expressions). The second term should represent a stronger or more intense version of the first. Concept / Approach: We compare candidate pairs for clear scalar escalation. We avoid pairs that switch categories (plan vs implement) or that present unrelated process chains (emotion vs act) lacking a clean intensity ladder. Step-by-Step Solution: Map the stem: Suggestion (weak) → Order (strong) within directives.“Smile : Laugh” — both are expressions of positive affect; laughing is generally a stronger, more intense expression than smiling.“Advise : Suggest” — roughly same strength; order reversed and not a clear escalation.“Plan : Implement” — intention vs execution; not intensity within a class.“Anger : Shout” — emotion vs behavior; not a scalar pair within one category. Verification / Alternative check: In common usage, smiling is subdued compared to laughing, making this pair a close structural match to suggestion versus order as milder versus stronger forms. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Advise : Suggest — similar modality; lacks a clear weaker-to-stronger progression. Plan : Implement — category shift from planning to doing. Anger : Shout — mismatched categories; an emotion may cause shouting but is not a stronger form of it. Common Pitfalls: Confusing cause–effect or process relations with graded intensity within a single domain. Final Answer: Smile : Laugh

Question 9

Analogy — Interview : Service Choose the pair that reflects a qualifying process leading to an attainment or conferral.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The pair “Interview : Service” signals a pathway where a qualifying process (interview) leads to a position or employment in service. The correct choice must similarly map a formal evaluative process to the status or credential it confers upon success. Given Data / Assumptions: Interviews are selection mechanisms before joining service. We require a conventional sequence: process → conferred outcome. Transportation, tickets, or oppositional pairs are out of scope. Concept / Approach: Identify which option preserves an institutional chain of progression. Discern whether the right-hand term is a recognized attainment that follows from passing the left-hand process. Step-by-Step Solution: “Examination : Degree” — examinations are formal assessments; successful completion is typically part of earning a degree.“Travel : Bus” — instrument vs activity; reversed and category mismatch.“Ticket : Travel” — prerequisite vs activity, not an evaluative conferral.“Light : Darkness” — antonymic or contrastive, not process → attainment. Verification / Alternative check: Educational systems globally pair examinations with degrees or certifications as outcomes of a qualification pathway, mirroring interviews preceding service appointments. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Travel : Bus — means of travel, not an attainment from a process. Ticket : Travel — enabling document, not a conferred status. Light : Darkness — unrelated contrast pair. Common Pitfalls: Choosing mere prerequisites or tools rather than a credential conferred by an evaluative process. Final Answer: Examination : Degree

Question 10

Analogy — Bihu : Asom (Assam) Pick the pair that correctly maps a cultural performance or festival to its home state.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The pair “Bihu : Asom (Assam)” associates a well-known festival with its originating Indian state. The correct answer must present a similarly accurate mapping of a dance or cultural form to its authentic regional home. Given Data / Assumptions: Bihu is celebrated in Assam. We must verify geographic-cultural correctness for each option. Spelling standardization is applied where needed while preserving intent. Concept / Approach: Check each dance or performing form against its state of origin or strongest association. Discard pairings that are mislocated to test attentiveness to Indian cultural geography. Step-by-Step Solution: “Bhangra : Punjab” — correct; Bhangra is a vibrant folk dance rooted in Punjab.“Garba : Bengal” — incorrect; Garba is from Gujarat.“Giddha : Gujarat” — incorrect; Giddha is a women’s folk dance of Punjab.“Yakshagana : Bihar” — incorrect; Yakshagana is a classical folk theater of Karnataka. Verification / Alternative check: Standard cultural references place Bhangra in Punjab and Garba in Gujarat; Yakshagana belongs to coastal Karnataka; thus only Bhangra : Punjab is accurate. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Garba : Bengal — state mismatch. Giddha : Gujarat — state mismatch. Yakshagana : Bihar — state mismatch. Common Pitfalls: Confusing similarly popular forms across states or assuming pan-Indian diffusion equals origin. Final Answer: Bhangra : Punjab

Question 11

Analogy — Plaintiff : Defendant Choose the pair that best preserves the relationship of opposing parties in a legal matter.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: In the stem “Plaintiff : Defendant,” the two terms denote opposing parties in a legal proceeding. In civil disputes, the plaintiff brings the action and the defendant answers it. We need an option that likewise captures a clear adversarial or opposing-party relationship within the legal context. Given Data / Assumptions: The analogy calls for role opposition, not mere association. Criminal and civil terminology differ, but the essence is complainant or victim versus the person alleged to have caused harm. We should reject pairs that mix institutions with roles or use synonyms rather than opposites. Concept / Approach: Test each option for role polarity similar to plaintiff versus defendant. Prefer a party harmed or complaining versus a party alleged responsible, reflecting an adversarial setup. Step-by-Step Solution: “Injured : Accused” — approximates victim (complainant) versus accused in a criminal matter, preserving opposition across the case.“Judge : Jury” — two different adjudicatory bodies, not opposing parties.“Court : Law” — institution versus abstract system; not parties.“Attorney : Lawyer” — synonyms, not opponents. Verification / Alternative check: Legal proceedings often frame disputes as complainant or injured party versus accused or defendant. While the exact civil counterpart of plaintiff is not “injured,” the adversarial polarity is best preserved by “Injured : Accused” among given choices. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Judge : Jury — cooperative functions, not adversaries. Court : Law — structure vs doctrine, not parties. Attorney : Lawyer — same role; no opposition. Common Pitfalls: Expecting exact civil terminology duplicates in options; the test checks for structural opposition, not identical labels. Final Answer: Injured : Accused

Question 12

Analogy — Attribute to object: Round : Earth :: ? : ?  Choose the pair that mirrors “shape/property : object”, just like “Round : Earth”.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Analogy questions often encode a precise semantic relation. In “Round : Earth”, “Round” is an attribute (shape) and “Earth” is the object that possesses that attribute. We must select a pair with the same “attribute → object” relationship, not “object → attribute” reversed, nor “part → whole”. Given Data / Assumptions: “Round” labels a shape; “Earth” is the entity described. Options mix attributes (Thin, Transparent), measures (Height), and objects (Paper, Gas, Dice). The best answer will preserve part-of-speech and role symmetry: adjective/noun (shape/property) → noun (object). Concept / Approach: The key is functional parallelism. “Round : Earth” is “shape : thing”. Among choices, “Cube : Dice” presents “shape : object typically having that shape.” It mirrors the relation exactly, unlike pairs where the right term is not an object (e.g., “Height” is not an attribute applied to “Mountain” in the same grammatical way; it is a measure dimension of the mountain). Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify relation = attribute (shape) assigned to an object.2) Evaluate options for attribute→object structure.3) “Cube : Dice” fits because a dice (die) is typically cubic.4) Other options violate symmetry or use a measure rather than an attribute. Verification / Alternative check: Substitute: “Round describes Earth” vs “Cube describes Dice.” Both read as “attribute applies to object.” Why Other Options Are Wrong: Thin : Paper — plausible attribute, but paper is not necessarily thin by definition; also less canonical than “dice are cube-shaped”. Height : Mountain — “Height” is a measure, not a describing adjective like “high”; relation type differs. Transparent : Gas — not all gases are transparent by necessity; weaker conventional pairing. None of these — incorrect since a valid pair exists. Common Pitfalls: Accepting any adjective–noun pair without checking whether the attribute is a defining/typical descriptor of the object (as “cube” is for “dice”). Final Answer: Cube : Dice

Question 13

Analogy — Part to whole (unit relation): Minute : Hour :: ? : ?  Select the pair that keeps the same “smaller unit : larger unit” relationship.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: “Minute : Hour” is a classic unit relation where the first term is a standard subunit of the second (60 minutes = 1 hour). The correct completion must preserve a fixed, conventional subdivision ratio rather than a vague aggregation. Given Data / Assumptions: A minute is a defined fraction of an hour. We seek another currency/time-like subunit with a codified conversion. Choices include mass/aggregation metaphors and discrete systems (currency, sets). Concept / Approach: The tightest parallel is the currency subunit: in the Indian system, 100 paise = 1 rupee (historically standard). This matches the “subunit-of” relationship precisely and unambiguously, like “minute” to “hour”. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify relation type: defined subunit → larger unit.2) Compare candidates for fixed conversion factors.3) “Paisa : Rupee” has a codified conversion; select it.4) Discard aggregations lacking fixed ratios. Verification / Alternative check: Just as you can compute hours from minutes by a constant factor, you can compute rupees from paise by a constant factor. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Drop : Ocean — Metaphorical aggregation; not a standardized subunit. People : Crowd — A set aggregation, not a unit system. Cup : Tea Set — Component vs set; no fixed quantitative conversion. None of these — invalid because a correct pair exists. Common Pitfalls: Choosing any “part-of” relation without ensuring a formal, countable conversion like time/currency units. Final Answer: Paisa : Rupee

Question 14

Analogy — Specific enactment to legal category: Statute : Law :: ? : ?  Pick the pair where the first is a specific type under the second, mirroring statute being a kind of law.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Legal analogies often capture taxonomy: a “statute” is a type of “law” (the broader legal category). We must preserve “specific legal unit → its broader class.” Given Data / Assumptions: Statute is a formal written law. Within documents, a “proviso” is a kind of clause that states a condition or exception. Other options mix organizational parts that do not preserve the same taxonomic relationship. Concept / Approach: The pattern is “X is a kind of Y.” Hence, “Proviso : Clause” fits best because a proviso is a particular subtype of clause, just as a statute is a particular form of law. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify the relation in the stem: specific enactment → broader legal category.2) Evaluate pairs for a clean subtype relationship.3) Select “Proviso : Clause”.4) Discard pairs that mix unrelated document structures. Verification / Alternative check: Legal drafting manuals define “proviso” as a clause that qualifies an earlier statement—clearly a subset of “clause”. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Chapter : Exercise — Not a subtype; different document entities. University : School — Peer institutions or hierarchy reversal; not subtype. Section : Illustration — An illustration explains a section; not a superordinate category. None of these — incorrect since a valid subtype pair exists. Common Pitfalls: Confusing explanatory/supporting parts (illustrations) with superordinate categories. Final Answer: Proviso : Clause

Question 15

Analogy — Institution and primary beneficiary: College : Student :: Hospital : ?  Choose the entity that stands to a hospital as “Student” stands to a college.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: This analogy uses the “institution → primary recipient/beneficiary” relation. Colleges primarily serve students; hospitals primarily serve patients. Staff (doctors, nurses) are providers, not beneficiaries. Given Data / Assumptions: College serves students’ educational needs. Hospital serves patients’ health needs. Options include providers (Doctor, Nurse) and objects (Medicine). Concept / Approach: Maintain role symmetry: “served-by” rather than “serves”. The analogue of “Student” in a hospital is “Patient”. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Determine the role of the right-hand term in each pair (beneficiary).2) Map “Hospital → Patient”.3) Exclude providers and non-person nouns. Verification / Alternative check: Institutional charters and everyday usage align: hospitals treat patients. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Doctor/Nurse: Service providers, not recipients. Medicine: An object used in treatment, not a beneficiary. None of these: Invalid since “Patient” fits perfectly. Common Pitfalls: Switching perspective from beneficiary to provider. Final Answer: Patient

Question 16

Analogy — Artisan and principal material: Cobbler : Leather :: Carpenter : ?  Select the material that a carpenter primarily works with, mirroring the cobbler–leather relation.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The stem encodes “artisan : principal material.” A cobbler works chiefly with leather; a carpenter works chiefly with wood. The answer must be a material, not a product or a tool. Given Data / Assumptions: Cobbler → Leather (material). Carpenter → ? (material). Options include products (Furniture, Chair) and a tool (Hammer). Concept / Approach: Preserve category parity: material vs product vs tool. “Wood” is the canonical material for carpenters, just as “leather” is for cobblers. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify role = principal material used by the artisan.2) Choose “Wood”.3) Exclude artifacts (Furniture/Chair) and instruments (Hammer). Verification / Alternative check: Trade definitions tie carpentry to wood construction and joinery. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Furniture/Chair: Finished products, not materials. Hammer: A tool; wrong category. None of these: Invalid, as “Wood” fits. Common Pitfalls: Matching “product” instead of “material”, breaking the cobbler–leather symmetry. Final Answer: Wood

Question 17

Analogy — Entry of an enclosure: House : Door :: Compound : ?  Choose the access element for a compound analogous to a door for a house.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A house is accessed via a door; a compound is accessed via a gate. The relation is “enclosure : principal access point”. Given Data / Assumptions: Door enables entry into a house. Gate enables entry into a walled/fenced compound. Concept / Approach: Pick the element that functions as the entry rather than boundary/support. Step-by-Step Solution: 1) Identify function = access.2) “Gate” matches; others do not provide entry. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Fence/Wall: Boundary, not a portal. Foundation: Structural base. None of these: Invalid because “Gate” fits. Final Answer: Gate

Question 18

Analogy — Place affiliation: Hong Kong : China :: Vatican : ?  Select the associated place most commonly paired with the Vatican in GK analogies.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: While Hong Kong is associated with China, the Vatican (Vatican City) is an independent enclave within the city of Rome. Exam analogies often present “Vatican — Rome” as the familiar association when “Italy” is not optioned. Concept / Approach: Maintain a well-known geographic association under the provided choices. Why Other Options Are Wrong: France/Mexico/Canada: No conventional pairing with the Vatican in such analogies. None of these: Invalid since “Rome” fits. Final Answer: Rome

Question 19

Analogy — Publication and lead creative role: Magazine : Editor :: Drama : ?  Pick the principal creative/managerial role for a drama, parallel to an editor for a magazine.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: An editor leads a magazine’s content and presentation; a director leads the creative realization of a drama (stage or screen). The relation is “work/institution : head creative/ editorial role.” Concept / Approach: Choose the role that exerts primary creative control and coherence over the work, analogous to an editor’s function for a magazine. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Player/Actor: Performers, not overall creative leads. Manager: Administrative; not the primary creative head. None of these: Invalid since “Director” fits squarely. Final Answer: Director

Question 20

Analogy — Seated object to sitter’s support: King : Throne :: Rider : ?  Choose the object that a rider uses for seating/support, analogous to a king’s throne.

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A king sits on a throne; a rider sits on a saddle. The relation is “person in role : specific seating object used in that role.” Concept / Approach: Select the specialized seating/support equipment for riders. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Chair/Seat: Generic items, not role-specific. Horse: The animal, not the seating object. None of these: Invalid since “Saddle” is correct. Final Answer: Saddle

Analogy Questions