RC Opinion vs Fact in CAT 2026: How to Distinguish Author's Claims From What Is Actually True
A deep-dive into the CAT RC opinion vs fact distinction — explaining why CAT tests what the author claims rather than objective truth, and presenting 3 language signals (epistemic verbs, certainty language, hedge vocabulary) that mark author's position in any passage. Includes a signal reference table, three signal-cards with keyword chip examples, a worked inference + tone question example on the same passage sentence, and a section on dual-voice passages (how to identify which position is the author's own after a pivot sentence).
Here is the thing most aspirants get wrong about CAT 2026 RC: the correct answer is not what is true. It's what the author claims is true. These are completely different things, and confusing them costs marks on every passage that contains a debatable position, a reported claim, or an author taking sides in a controversy.
CAT RC is a test of comprehension, not factual knowledge. The exam cannot ask "Is this statement true?" because the answer would depend on your knowledge of the topic, not on your reading. So it asks instead: "What does the author argue?" and "What does the passage imply?" The 3 language signals in this guide teach you to read the author's stance accurately — and to stop accidentally substituting your own view of what's correct.
See exactly how author's tone and claim questions affect your current VARC score.
Predict My PercentileWhy the opinion vs fact distinction drives RC answer selection
Take an RC passage where an author argues that social media has made public discourse more polarised. You happen to believe (or know from reading elsewhere) that social media actually increases exposure to diverse viewpoints. Does your belief affect the answer to "What does the author suggest about social media's effect on public discourse?"
No. The answer comes entirely from the passage — from how the author characterises social media. The question tests whether you read the author's position accurately, not whether the author is right.
Where aspirants lose marks is in inference questions. A classic wrong inference option on this passage might read: "Research confirms that social media increases political polarisation." This option states something the author argues, but presents it as established fact. The passage doesn't present it as fact — it presents it as the author's position. The correct inference would stay within the author's framing: "The author believes social media platforms have intensified polarisation." Recognising this framing difference is exactly what the 3-signal system trains.
Myth: The correct inference is the one that matches what is actually true about the topic.
Reality: The correct inference is the one that accurately extends the author's stated position — regardless of whether that position is correct, well-supported, or matches your prior knowledge. Any inference that upgrades the author's claim (from "the author argues X" to "it is established that X") is wrong.
The 3 language signals
These signals appear in every CAT RC passage. Reading them correctly determines whether you know the author is stating a fact, expressing an opinion, or reporting someone else's view without endorsing it.
| Signal | Examples | What It Tells You |
|---|---|---|
| Epistemic verbs | argue, claim, suggest, contend, propose, assert, maintain, insist, believe, posit | The author (or another voice in the passage) is expressing a position, not reporting a verified fact. What follows is their view. |
| Certainty language | High: certainly, clearly, undeniably, evidently, obviously. Low: may, might, could, possibly, arguably, appears to, seems to | Certainty language grades how confident the author is. Low certainty = the author is qualifying the claim. "This may suggest X" is weaker than "This shows X." |
| Hedge vocabulary | purportedly, allegedly, ostensibly, supposedly, claimed to be, so-called, what is described as | The author is reporting a position without endorsing it — often signalling skepticism. "The purportedly revolutionary approach" implies the author questions whether it's actually revolutionary. |
Signal 1: Epistemic verbs
Signal 2: Certainty language
Signal 3: Hedge vocabulary
When you read a CAT RC passage, mark epistemic verbs with a circle, certainty qualifiers with an underline, and hedge vocabulary with a wavy underline. This 3-symbol system ensures you don't miss the signal — especially in dense academic passages where hedge vocabulary is common but easy to read past if you're focused on topic comprehension.
Applying the 3 signals to question types
Each of the 3 signals matters most for specific question types in the CAT VARC question format. Knowing which signal to use for which question type prevents the most common errors.
Inference questions: Apply Signal 1 and Signal 2. The correct inference must match the certainty level of the original claim. If the author uses "may suggest," the correct inference cannot say "demonstrates." If the question asks what the author implies, look for an option that extends the author's epistemic verb — not one that presents the claim as objective fact.
Author's tone questions: Apply Signal 3. Hedge vocabulary throughout a passage marks critical or skeptical tone. If an author describes a policy as "allegedly effective" and a programme as "the so-called reform," they're not neutral — they're skeptical. The correct tone option will be something like "critical" or "skeptical," not "objective" or "analytical."
Main idea questions: Apply all 3 signals to the first and last paragraphs. The main idea is usually the central epistemic claim — what the author most strongly argues. High-certainty language in the opening or conclusion marks the claim as the author's primary thesis.
Inference question: What can be inferred about economists' view of UBI?
Wrong: "Economists believe UBI eliminates welfare dependency."
Wrong: "Economists have conclusively shown UBI reduces welfare dependency."
Correct: "Economists hold a tentative positive view of UBI's potential while recognising limited evidence."
(The verbs are "argue" + "may reduce" + "remains mixed" — the correct inference stays at this certainty level.)
Tone question: What is the author's attitude toward the economists' position?
Wrong: "Enthusiastic endorsement."
Wrong: "Complete agreement."
Correct: "Measured presentation with implicit reservations."
("They acknowledge, remains decidedly mixed" signals the author is noting the limitations of the economists' claim rather than endorsing it.)
The dual-voice trap: when the passage presents two positions
Many CAT RC passages present two positions — the author's view and a counter-view that the author then engages with. The most common error here is treating the counter-view as the author's view, especially when the counter-view section is longer.
When a passage has two positions, it almost always follows this structure:
- Counter-position introduced (often with reporting verbs: "critics argue," "some claim," "the traditional view holds")
- Pivot sentence (however, but, yet, in contrast — marks the shift to the author's own voice)
- Author's actual position (stated without reporting verbs, often with higher certainty language or clear evaluative language)
Questions about the author's view should be answered from section 3, not from section 1 — even if section 1 is longer. The pivot sentence is your signal to switch. The passage mapping technique covers how to annotate the pivot sentence during reading so you don't confuse reported positions with the author's own argument.
Track your RC accuracy on opinion-type questions using the Optima Learn practice questions bank, which lets you filter specifically by inference and author's tone question types and see your accuracy by signal type over time. The score predictor translates your current RC accuracy directly into expected VARC percentile, so you can see exactly how each 1-mark improvement in inference accuracy affects your IIM eligibility.
Get a Personalised VARC Strategy Session
Inference and tone questions are learnable. A mentor session walks you through your specific error patterns across these question types and builds a targeted fix plan.
Book a Free CAT Strategy CallKey Takeaways
- CAT RC tests what the author claims — not what is objectively true. Never substitute your own knowledge when answering "what does the author argue/suggest/imply."
- Signal 1 (Epistemic verbs): argue, claim, suggest, contend → what follows is a position, not a fact. Inferences must match the verb's frame.
- Signal 2 (Certainty language): may/might/possibly vs. clearly/certainly → the certainty level of the claim must match the certainty of the correct answer. Never infer "demonstrates" from "may suggest."
- Signal 3 (Hedge vocabulary): purportedly, allegedly, ostensibly, so-called → the author is reporting without endorsing, usually with skepticism. Tone questions: the author is not neutral here.
- Dual-voice passages: identify the pivot sentence. The author's actual position comes after "however / but / yet." Don't answer tone or inference questions from the counter-position section.
For complete CAT 2026 preparation across all VARC question types, each guide in the Optima Learn VARC series covers one specific skill — so you can focus on the types where your mock data shows the most room to improve.
Practice VARC on real CAT passages
Tagged RC, para-summary, and sentence-completion drills from CAT 2010 to 2024.