Oskosh wrote:Seeing some improvement in logical reasoning! Went -1 and -2 on the LR sections of the PT I took today.
Something that should be easy to fix: The fact that I sometimes am SOO confident in an answer and choose it without reading the others, and another answer ends up doing a better job. For instance, one of the questions that I got wrong was a role question (PT 33, Section 3, Question 14). I see that it says that the statistics are used to show that there is NO relation (I should have doubted it then, with such strong wording!), but I went for it and answered D. As it turns out, E had a softer, more correct answer (suggest that the number... is not the only influence). Ugh!
Problem that I can't find my way out of: Overthinking. Same preptest, same section, but question 7. I eliminate answer choice a because I think that newspapers and tvs offering more "comprehensive" coverage is insignificant to the argument. Like, they could still offer the same number of stories, but they would just expound on them at length.
What I'm trying to focus on in LR every question is : What is the premise to conclusion jump and what are they failing to consider. For PT33.3.7 when reading the question I see
Premise: change in media coverage
Conclusion: Violence is out of control.
The stem is basically a weaken question so I would look for something that could explain the media coverage does not show that violence is out of control. I would probably not eliminate answers talking about the media coverage my first go around because (as someone else in this thread emphasized to me earlier) strengthen/weaken answers aren't always slam dunks.
Premise: Similar ratios have different crime rates.
Conclusion: Increasing the number of officer is NOT the only way decrease crime
Since the statistics are the premise the question is basically "What is the conclusion of the argument"
I've been using much more process of elimination in LR than when I started out. Maybe this would help your issue of being overconfident in one answer choice, saying that you won't circle/bubble an answer until you've read all the answers and crossed out ones you know are wrong.