Phrase I fail to understand

lawschool2014hopeful
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:48 pm

Phrase I fail to understand

Postby lawschool2014hopeful » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:13 pm

I am working through prep test #13, Section 4 (logical reasoning/question 22)

I come across this question

(Survey asking to rate 400 famous brands, but only 27 brands are available in nation, recognizing only certain brands those are the only available brands in the country)

I fail to comprehend the full meaning of answer choice A)-> The right answer.
"Never ask all respondents a question if it cannot reasonably be answered by respondents who make a particular response to another question in the same survey."
--> just what does respondents who make a particular response to another question in the same survey mean? Should I worry about this at all? or should I just ignore this question because is just awkward wording and probably will never encounter stuff liek this again.

Thanks.

User avatar
Br3v
Posts: 4174
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 7:18 pm

Re: Phrase I fail to understand

Postby Br3v » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:24 pm

jimmierock wrote:I am working through prep test #13, Section 4 (logical reasoning/question 22)

I come across this question

(Survey asking to rate 400 famous brands, but only 27 brands are available in nation, recognizing only certain brands those are the only available brands in the country)

I fail to comprehend the full meaning of answer choice A)-> The right answer.
"Never ask all respondents a question if it cannot reasonably be answered by respondents who make a particular response to another question in the same survey."
--> just what does respondents who make a particular response to another question in the same survey mean? Should I worry about this at all? or should I just ignore this question because is just awkward wording and probably will never encounter stuff liek this again.

Thanks.


Didn't look up question but I remember it from awhile back so bear with me:

I believe the question asks for a principal? In this case a principal that weakens it? Well what the answer is saying is you should ask certain people a question "about the brands" if they answer a certain way about another question "in this case they answer no to have you heard of the brand or from its country or whatever"

Get it? If I answer that yes I've never heard of the brand, you shouldn't proceed to ask me what I think about it

lawschool2014hopeful
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:48 pm

Re: Phrase I fail to understand

Postby lawschool2014hopeful » Mon Apr 30, 2012 11:34 pm

Took me 5 reads ahha, but I finally get it now, thanks!

Goddamn it, the stupid wording is so weird sigh.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: applejacks888, BobBoblaw, CPA-->JD, Google [Bot], jonny27, Lahtso Nuggin, LewD33, malysh, mrgstephe, ponderingmeerkat, StopLawying, Tazewell and 22 guests