Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section Forum

[citrustang]

Even if you did misinterpret it, and I don't see how you could, the first question made it obvious as to what quality of the individuals in question the term had to refer to (how's that for ambiguity?).

Nicely done.

[Moose Thompson]

Can someone post the ambiguous word? Or is that against rules? I don't feel like that is against rules.

If you read the entire thread you will stumble upon it. Also, you will be all caught up on the conversation.


OP, I feel your pain, but I don't think your argument has a chance. I look forward to seeing the actual question when the test is released, but based on the descriptions I've heard here it is unlikely that this game will be successfully contested. Good luck, though.

[atrides15693]

For those who don't think the term can be understood in two ways, consider the very name of this blog: http://inthefield.blogs.cnn.com/

In the context of the profession we're talking about, this would be a very common use of the term (ie, it means "on location"). Personally I think this is a more cogent argument than the dictionary definition one: there are many definitions, but in the context the term has a common meaning.

I don't think anyone is arguing that the term couldn't have been understood correctly, only that the "clear and unambiguous" policy wasn't really followed here.

[mallard]

For those who don't think the term can be understood in two ways, consider the very name of this blog: http://inthefield.blogs.cnn.com/

In the context of the profession we're talking about, this would be a very common use of the term (ie, it means "on location"). Personally I think this is a more cogent argument than the dictionary definition one: there are many definitions, but in the context the term has a common meaning.

I don't think anyone is arguing that the term couldn't have been understood correctly, only that the "clear and unambiguous" policy wasn't really followed here.

This is exactly what I was saying earlier: "the field," understood locationally, is a general term that means away from the office or theoretical environment and in some sort of practical setting.

[budafied]

I'll have to chime in and add that it didn't even register in my mind that the word could be taken a different way, not even for a millisecond, until I saw this thread. And I had a whale of a time doing this section ANYWAYS, without this secondary confusion thrown into the loop.

Agreed, except I owned LG.

This may be irrelevant, but I think it's worth noting that some of us understood the meaning of the "questionable" term from the get-go with absolutely no problems.

[Godlike]

Yeah I realize that. I'm just curious if you can get it down to only one correct answer if you misinterpreted a word.

No if you interpret the wrong way, you cannot find onw right answer for the subsequent problems. However, this does not mean you realize the mistake anytime soon, as if you the question says something to the effect of "which of these cannot be true" as soon as you find an answer that cannot be true you may move on without trying all the answers...

[scruffs mcguff]

Yeah I realize that. I'm just curious if you can get it down to only one correct answer if you misinterpreted a word.

No if you interpret the wrong way, you cannot find onw right answer for the subsequent problems. However, this does not mean you realize the mistake anytime soon, as if you the question says something to the effect of "which of these cannot be true" as soon as you find an answer that cannot be true you may move on without trying all the answers...

Yeah but just because thats the way we answer these questions doesn't mean it is correct.

[Bildungsroman]

All this thread needs now is an internet petition.

[DanInALionsDen]

I really want to know what the problem setup was now. This ambiguity is killing me.

[Hey-O]

I did not make this mistake. I didn't even register that there could be another meaning of for the term. However, once it was brought to my attention I see how people could easily have made the mistake.

It is unusual to use the term in that way, except for the journalism profession which actually uses the term frequently to mean, 'on assignment in a specific place.'

I wish the people challenging luck, even though I had no problem with the game. If I missed any questions it was because I wasn't fast enough not because the game was poorly worded.

I think that people who are worrying that LSAC will deduct the six questions from the game are worrying needlessly. I don't think that would be an option. They wouldn't mess up a whole test like that.

If they take any action they might cancel the score/refund the test fee for those who complain. If I were amongst the complainers that is what I would ask LSAC for. That is reasonable and they might do it

[Philipsssssss]

I think that the rule about the 2 Variables in question was stated in a little bit of an Out-of-Scope way. The term "profession" wasn't really present anywhere in the game "stimuli".

I don't recall that on other games there was a name for something that mean something that was named differently.

If i recall correctly, being someones "assistant" doesn't really strike as being in that "profession". It just sounds confusing and easy to overlook...

[d34d9823]

I think that the rule about the 2 Variables in question was stated in a little bit of an Out-of-Scope way. The term "profession" wasn't really present anywhere in the game "stimuli".

I don't recall on other games there was a name for something that mean something that was named differently.

If i recall correctly, being someones "assistant" doesn't really strike as being in that "profession".

This was my brother's argument as well. I can't see LSAC buying it though.

[Ryhart]

Quick question: Does anyone remember if it was the word "train" or "work" which was the verb associated with the term in question?

[oxford_don]

[]

[engsplitter]

i tried doing the whole thing thinking the 'x and y must do together' 'z and w must not do together' meant one thing then realize the questions didn't make sense
so i went back and did it using the other way around and it worked fine, but i ran out of time
it was kind of bull

[Hey-O]

To the OP and those who agree with this challenge, what do you see happening IF LSAC agrees that the ambiguity somehow compromised the fairness of the game? Just curious what the options really are.

See what I wrote above. I think the best they could hope for is a refund and retake. LSAC won't throw out the that many questions.

[Gallon_Ziplock]

I posted last night on the thread that no longer exists, but here is a recap:

I regularly score 170+ on LSAT tests, am a native English speaker, and consider LG's to be one of my best sections. That said, I have never struggled so hard on a logic games section in recent memory. I skipped the mulch one to do the game in question, and promptly misinterpreted the word in question in the same way that citrustang and so many others did. I made it through the questions by eliminating what I thought were all the wrong answers and choosing the remaining ones. I eventually caught my error but by the time I tried to go back and redo my diagram and the questions I had used up my time and was forced to make only slightly-educated guesses on both the mulch game and the 4th game. To go from averaging -1 to -3 on logic games to yesterday's performance is extremely frustrating. I want to thank citrustang for bringing attention to this issue, absolutely intend to write LSAC, and encourage everyone else who had the same problem to do the same.

[engsplitter]

Unfortunately, I got too upset (because I'd never missed a LG on any of the practice tests) and I think this mentally screwed with me for the rest of the test. I know it especially did on the Reading Comp...

this is identical to what happened to me

[citrustang]

Quick question: Does anyone remember if it was the word "train" or "work" which was the verb associated with the term in question?

I believe the word was "work." Is there a major difference between the two?

To the OP and those who agree with this challenge, what do you see happening IF LSAC agrees that the ambiguity somehow compromised the fairness of the game? Just curious what the options really are.

I won't hazard a prediction. LSAC can deal with the matter as they deem fit. All I'm responsible for is raising an issue I think is worth some consideration.

[rklafehn]

ahhh.. the word was "field"?

As in the assistants could either be a writer or a photographer (their field).

"Field of work" implies "profession" not "physical location".

I do not believe there was any ambiguity. If they were working actual fields as opposed to countries then the people supporting a challenge of this game may have a chance at being successful.

[bk1]

ITT: People trying to rationalize a misinterpretation of their own making and petitioning LSAC to agree with this rationalization rather than owning up to the fact that they are wrong.

[citrustang]

If you think we're wrong, then you have nothing to worry about.

[bk1]

If you think we're wrong, then you have nothing to worry about.

I think it is less about worrying and more about laughing.

[alphagamma]

ahhh.. the word was "field"?

As in the assistants could either be a writer or a photographer (their field).

"Field of work" implies "profession" not "physical location".

I do not believe there was any ambiguity. If they were working actual fields as opposed to countries then the people supporting a challenge of this game may have a chance at being successful.

The problem is that they were reporters (IIRC). And reporters work in the field.

[Fark-o-vision]

I kind of want to see this happen just because of all of the smug on this thread.