LR section with the most absurd answer pattern ever? Forum

[nireca]

How can otherwise intelligent and logical people be so convinced that scantron answer patterns offer some insight into whether one did well or not?

I don't think it offers much insight regarding whether I did well or not. However, due to its irregularity, it is cause for concern, especially if no one else experienced it on the test (which, fortunately, doesn't seem to be the case). Imagine if every answer was D for a section. Granted, unless I saw a mistake that I made somewhere in the section I am not going to change a single answer, but it is extremely unlikely that this would ever happen, and so, I don't think it would be unreasonable to think that perhaps you had made a mistake, especially if you didn't have time to go back and review your work.

[risktaker]

I actually got 5 C's in a row on one of the LR's. Hope I didn't miss one of those.

[Pahnda]

I actually got 5 C's in a row on one of the LR's. Hope I didn't miss one of those.

I'm kinda interested to see if you get -0 on this section as it'll be the first time in the history of the LSAT (if I'm remembering correct) to have 5 in a row... I'm interested even if that means I got a -1 if it's true! Sorta like being there while violent history is being written, haha.

[sundance95]

It's simple. LSAC deliberately avoids certain patterns because the patterns throw off students and make questions in the patterns statistically unreliable. The problem has a feedback cycle, because test-takers know that LSAC avoids odd patters (not as much as the SAT or the ACT, but LSAC does to some extent). Four or five in a row should happen more often than they do if answers are truly random; same with cascades. Similarly, there has never been, nor ever will be, a section with no answers of a certain letter, though this should happen from time to time (especially with game sections containing only 22 questions).

Is there any evidence or statement from LSAC that backs this proposition?

[sundance95]

How can otherwise intelligent and logical people be so convinced that scantron answer patterns offer some insight into whether one did well or not?

I don't think it offers much insight regarding whether I did well or not. However, due to its irregularity, it is cause for concern, especially if no one else experienced it on the test (which, fortunately, doesn't seem to be the case). Imagine if every answer was D for a section. Granted, unless I saw a mistake that I made somewhere in the section I am not going to change a single answer, but it is extremely unlikely that this would ever happen, and so, I don't think it would be unreasonable to think that perhaps you had made a mistake, especially if you didn't have time to go back and review your work.

Sure, if *every* answer was D, you'd naturally be perturbed because the statistical odds of rolling a 5 sided die 26 times in a row and getting a 5 every time are astronomical. However, getting four or five in a row...much less so, especially when you realize that its almost a certainty that this will happen occasionally given a data set of all LSAT sections ever produced, rather than focusing on one particular test.

[nireca]

How can otherwise intelligent and logical people be so convinced that scantron answer patterns offer some insight into whether one did well or not?

I don't think it offers much insight regarding whether I did well or not. However, due to its irregularity, it is cause for concern, especially if no one else experienced it on the test (which, fortunately, doesn't seem to be the case). Imagine if every answer was D for a section. Granted, unless I saw a mistake that I made somewhere in the section I am not going to change a single answer, but it is extremely unlikely that this would ever happen, and so, I don't think it would be unreasonable to think that perhaps you had made a mistake, especially if you didn't have time to go back and review your work.

Sure, if *every* answer was D, you'd naturally be perturbed because the statistical odds of rolling a 5 sided die 26 times in a row and getting a 5 every time are astronomical. However, getting four or five in a row...much less so, especially when you realize that its almost a certainty that this will happen occasionally given a data set of all LSAT sections ever produced, rather than focusing on one particular test.

This was not simply a 4-5 in a row but a section in which much of the grid was dominated by 2 letters often occurring in succession. I'm curious, did you take the June LSAT? Trust me, seeing 4 answers in a row, or even 5, that wouldn't concern me. Maybe it would warrant a review, but this was different.

[sundance95]

I did take it, but I took no notice of the patterns as I didn't (and don't) consider them relevant to my performance. So to answer your question, I might have bubbled D eighteen times in a row, but couldn't tell you today whether that was the case. The stimuli, question stem, and answers were my primary focus. That and ensuring that I was bubbling the correct bubble.

I always mark my answers after each LG and RC section, and each pair of pages in LR, so that may be why I took less notice.

[cigarman]

This was not simply a 4-5 in a row but a section in which much of the grid was dominated by 2 letters often occurring in succession. I'm curious, did you take the June LSAT? Trust me, seeing 4 answers in a row, or even 5, that wouldn't concern me. Maybe it would warrant a review, but this was different.

I suspuspect you had LR LG LR RC LR and are refferring to the second LR section. My second LR section had 10 E answers and 9 D answers. Two A's and Two B's with 4 c's or something. I was freaked! But, I suspect from the other thread this was the experimental section. If not... I hear the burger joint is hiring.

[nireca]

Well i agree with you there but I did notice and, to be honest, i wish i hadn't. I would have preferred to see a standard, no-funny-business answer pattern, just would have been less reason to second guess myself after the fact I suppose.

[makingwaves]

After I turned in my test, I felt like I was going to cry because I looked at the answer sheet and saw I had like two of a letter and tons of two. So I know how you felt lol.

I wish I had a clue what I did! I don't even remember looking at the scantron before I handed it to my proctor.

[theavrock]

This was not simply a 4-5 in a row but a section in which much of the grid was dominated by 2 letters often occurring in succession. I'm curious, did you take the June LSAT? Trust me, seeing 4 answers in a row, or even 5, that wouldn't concern me. Maybe it would warrant a review, but this was different.

I suspuspect you had LR LG LR RC LR and are refferring to the second LR section. My second LR section had 10 E answers and 9 D answers. Two A's and Two B's with 4 c's or something. I was freaked! But, I suspect from the other thread this was the experimental section. If not... I hear the burger joint is hiring.

This almost exactly what I had. If I remember correctly the A's and B's were at the beginning and at the end of the section.

[Pahnda]

This was not simply a 4-5 in a row but a section in which much of the grid was dominated by 2 letters often occurring in succession. I'm curious, did you take the June LSAT? Trust me, seeing 4 answers in a row, or even 5, that wouldn't concern me. Maybe it would warrant a review, but this was different.

I suspuspect you had LR LG LR RC LR and are refferring to the second LR section. My second LR section had 10 E answers and 9 D answers. Two A's and Two B's with 4 c's or something. I was freaked! But, I suspect from the other thread this was the experimental section. If not... I hear the burger joint is hiring.

This almost exactly what I had. If I remember correctly the A's and B's were at the beginning and at the end of the section.

I remember something like that... But I don't remember noticing a huge amount of Es. I was just noticing a couple chains really close to eachother and the lack of many As/Bs. The only Cs I really remember were in a chain also (but probably had more random ones around too).

[crossingforHYS]

me too!!!! I am SO happy I found this thread!

[snowfight]

^ The cascade is in reference to Oct 09 and not just recently, right?

nvm. i don't remember what i put where anymore. Except one section 4 in a row, one different, three in a row. so many in a row.

I also remember one section that had four in a row, one different, and then three in a row. I don't generally look at my spread, but I noticed this when bubbling in and even though I double checked my answers, felt I must have done at least one of them incorrectly. Thanks for boosting my confidence a little while waiting!

[Hey-O]

How can otherwise intelligent and logical people be so convinced that scantron answer patterns offer some insight into whether one did well or not?

Because if you're scantron had five As all in a row then there is 99% chance that one of those questions was wrong. Using the scantron intelligently can give you can idea of where you might need to review a question that you got wrong.

[cmutone]

totally know what you're talkin about. there was a 4 in a row early (7-10), threw me off like crazy bc i dont drop those. then there was a 3 in a row, there was also (i don't recall if this was all in the same section or not) a series of answers that were composed of only 2 letters-- i think it was like 8-10 in total, maybe more. very strange business for sure

[Hey-O]

Could some people please PM me with their answer pattern (s) (as they recall it and why it was absurd). I am not panicking because I think that my answer pattern was totally different. It wouldn't make any difference but it would make me feel better (or worse).

[sundance95]

How can otherwise intelligent and logical people be so convinced that scantron answer patterns offer some insight into whether one did well or not?

Because if you're scantron had five As all in a row then there is 99% chance that one of those questions was wrong. Using the scantron intelligently can give you can idea of where you might need to review a question that you got wrong.

Are you serious?

Perhaps I'm stupid. Please logically explain to me how 5 consecutive questions that have A as the answer means there's
"a 99% chance that one of those questions is wrong."

[Knock]

How can otherwise intelligent and logical people be so convinced that scantron answer patterns offer some insight into whether one did well or not?

Because if you're scantron had five As all in a row then there is 99% chance that one of those questions was wrong. Using the scantron intelligently can give you can idea of where you might need to review a question that you got wrong.

Are you serious?

Perhaps I'm stupid. Please logically explain to me how 5 consecutive questions that have A as the answer means there's
"a 99% chance that one of those questions is wrong."

Because in 60+ PT's, there's never been a 5 consecutive answers with the same letter.

[nematoad]

[Hey-O]

How can otherwise intelligent and logical people be so convinced that scantron answer patterns offer some insight into whether one did well or not?

Because if you're scantron had five As all in a row then there is 99% chance that one of those questions was wrong. Using the scantron intelligently can give you can idea of where you might need to review a question that you got wrong.

Are you serious?

Perhaps I'm stupid. Please logically explain to me how 5 consecutive questions that have A as the answer means there's
"a 99% chance that one of those questions is wrong."

If the answer choices were random then there would probably be a test with 5 in a row or no As or something. But the answers are not entirely random. In all the tests that the LSAC has ever given there has never been 5 in a row. This means that either the LSAC has changed its policy OR you have the answer wrong. Either way, it merits a quick glance at the questions.

[sundance95]

This means that either the LSAC has changed its policy OR you have the answer wrong.

You are making an unwarranted assumption, namely, that LSAC has any policy at all regarding repetitious answer choices. It very well could be that there is none and now, randomly, five in a row are correct.

4 test a year, 5 sections each, ~25 answers per section, 19 years of administering tests ~= 9,500 questions administered thus far in the history of the modern LSAT. The fact that a statistically improbable sequence occurred in your test means nothing, given 9,500 repetitions it would be statistically unlikely for five in a row not to occasionally occur.

Moral of the story: study hard enough to be confident enough in your answer and not worry about 'patterns.'

[alicrimson]

This means that either the LSAC has changed its policy OR you have the answer wrong.

You are making an unwarranted assumption, namely, that LSAC has any policy at all regarding repetitious answer choices. It very well could be that there is none and now, randomly, five in a row are correct.

4 test a year, 5 sections each, ~25 answers per section, 19 years of administering tests ~= 9,500 questions administered thus far in the history of the modern LSAT. The fact that a statistically improbable sequence occurred in your test means nothing, given 9,500 repetitions it would be statistically unlikely for five in a row not to occasionally occur.

Moral of the story: study hard enough to be confident enough in your answer and not worry about 'patterns.'

unwarranted assumption....hahaha

[nematoad]

This means that either the LSAC has changed its policy OR you have the answer wrong.

You are making an unwarranted assumption, namely, that LSAC has any policy at all regarding repetitious answer choices. It very well could be that there is none and now, randomly, five in a row are correct.

4 test a year, 5 sections each, ~25 answers per section, 19 years of administering tests ~= 9,500 questions administered thus far in the history of the modern LSAT. The fact that a statistically improbable sequence occurred in your test means nothing, given 9,500 repetitions it would be statistically unlikely for five in a row not to occasionally occur.

Moral of the story: study hard enough to be confident enough in your answer and not worry about 'patterns.'

yeah but were all done with the study part. now, with all this built up angst, its time for us to jerk each other around and talk about how good see's candy lollipops are, esp. all 5 flavors at once or in succession

[Albatross]

After I turned in my test, I felt like I was going to cry because I looked at the answer sheet and saw I had like two of a letter and tons of two. So I know how you felt lol.

Thank god. I felt like half of the test was AAEECCBBDDAAEEBBDDEEAABBEEDD. Something along the lines of that<<<.