PT 30, LG Question 7.
7. "The first and last messages on the answering machine could be the first and second messages left by which one of the following?"
What is being asked and how did you solve it? Thanks!
What Exactly Is This Asking? Forum
-
Manhattan LSAT Noah
- Posts: 744
- Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2010 8:43 am
Re: What Exactly Is This Asking?
A student explained herthinking on this very question.OUBobcat wrote:PT 30, LG Question 7.
7. "The first and last messages on the answering machine could be the first and second messages left by which one of the following?"
What is being asked and how did you solve it? Thanks!
-
Jeffort
- Posts: 1888
- Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 4:43 pm
Re: What Exactly Is This Asking?
An important factor for solving all the questions that is left out of the linked explanation is that the game does not require each of the six people ( F G H L P T ) to leave a message.
People that don't properly analyze the stimulus and set-up it up well before rushing into the questions commonly make the mistake of falsely assuming that each of the six variables must be placed in the sequence (leave a message) as if it's a typical one to one correspondence sequencing game and then try to attack the questions with that mindset.
However, it's a sequencing & grouping/selection hybrid game that heavily revolves around the numerical distribution possibilities of how many people do leave messages if somebody leaves more than one. You have to pay attention to that part in order to figure out which of the conditional sequencing rules apply.
The second question of the game (#7) is actually LSAC being nice by explicitly reminding you in the question stem that you have to deal with in/out variable selection as well as sequencing before you have wasted time being frustrated by the questions thinking something like: "WTF? these sequencing rules aren't working on the questions like usual. Something went sideways, did I lose my brain or is this game flawed? Hmm, yeah, LSAC messed up, it's flawed, I'll email them on Monday to complain. Crap, 5 minute warning already? I'm still on game #2!"
Call the question #7 stem a friendly reminder from LSAC test writer gremlins akin to "Hello peeps, in case you didn't yet notice from the first and second indented rules, before you attempt the questions you should think about in/out selection & numerical distribution stuff as well as the sequencing. Cheers! We swear we really aren't evil people, we're just misunderstood a lot!"
Due to the in/out selection aspect, if somebody leaves more than one message then at least one of the six people will not.
Note that the first and second indented rules dictate that one of the six people can leave either two or three messages, thus creating three variable selection numerical distribution possibilities.
Because of the transitive relationships of the conditional sequencing rules, when less than 6 of the people leave messages (somebody blows up your phone and leaves either 2 or 3 messages), G cannot leave a message and you are left with F H L P T to fill the slots. Since one person can leave three messages, it can be just four of the six that fill the slots in the sequence. Looking at it that way pretty much makes questions 7 through 10 go smoothly since you have to deal with who leaves messages before you can know which sequencing rules apply.
People that rush in treating it like a typical/regular sequencing game get their butts kicked by the questions while time flies by and points are lost.
People that don't properly analyze the stimulus and set-up it up well before rushing into the questions commonly make the mistake of falsely assuming that each of the six variables must be placed in the sequence (leave a message) as if it's a typical one to one correspondence sequencing game and then try to attack the questions with that mindset.
However, it's a sequencing & grouping/selection hybrid game that heavily revolves around the numerical distribution possibilities of how many people do leave messages if somebody leaves more than one. You have to pay attention to that part in order to figure out which of the conditional sequencing rules apply.
The second question of the game (#7) is actually LSAC being nice by explicitly reminding you in the question stem that you have to deal with in/out variable selection as well as sequencing before you have wasted time being frustrated by the questions thinking something like: "WTF? these sequencing rules aren't working on the questions like usual. Something went sideways, did I lose my brain or is this game flawed? Hmm, yeah, LSAC messed up, it's flawed, I'll email them on Monday to complain. Crap, 5 minute warning already? I'm still on game #2!"
Call the question #7 stem a friendly reminder from LSAC test writer gremlins akin to "Hello peeps, in case you didn't yet notice from the first and second indented rules, before you attempt the questions you should think about in/out selection & numerical distribution stuff as well as the sequencing. Cheers! We swear we really aren't evil people, we're just misunderstood a lot!"
Due to the in/out selection aspect, if somebody leaves more than one message then at least one of the six people will not.
Note that the first and second indented rules dictate that one of the six people can leave either two or three messages, thus creating three variable selection numerical distribution possibilities.
Because of the transitive relationships of the conditional sequencing rules, when less than 6 of the people leave messages (somebody blows up your phone and leaves either 2 or 3 messages), G cannot leave a message and you are left with F H L P T to fill the slots. Since one person can leave three messages, it can be just four of the six that fill the slots in the sequence. Looking at it that way pretty much makes questions 7 through 10 go smoothly since you have to deal with who leaves messages before you can know which sequencing rules apply.
People that rush in treating it like a typical/regular sequencing game get their butts kicked by the questions while time flies by and points are lost.
