re-read LR stimulus Forum

[wanderlust]

When I review RC, many books recommend going back to the passage in stead of relying on memory.
I find that in some LR questions, esp. inference or Must be true questions, the most attractive wrong answer often hinges on a maneuver of some detail mentioned in the stimulus, sometimes just change a single word. So I wonder, perhaps, the LR questions could be attacked by
1. quickly read the stimulus, get the main idea
2. go back to the stimulus to check details when the answer choices are narrowed down to two

[Nova]

I think you would be better off reading the stimulus thoroughly, then referring back as necessary, rather than skimming the first time. IMO, reading the stimulus quickly and not absorbing everything is a waste of time. One can not accurately attack the answer choices without a good grasp on everything that is going on.

[Psib337]

In RC I think think they tell you to go back to the passage when you need to be because chances are pretty good that you won't remember everything. For LR reading the stimulus is short enough so that you can remember everything if you take your time to read it slowly and really understand what's going on. By reading it quickly and going back you 1) waste time havig to read it twice and 2) probably have a better chance of eliminating the right answer your first time through because you didn't read it carefully enough.

[TylerJonesMPLS]

Your suggestion is definitely worth trying when the question type is logical deduction, as you say, and the correct AC can only be determined by a logical diagram or a written-out series of conditionals. Of course, everyone is different, but this may be the method that works best for you.

If I have understood you correctly, the 2007 June PT, Section 3 Question 22 is an example of what you mean. You can immediately identify the question as a deduction question, because it says, “Which…follows logically…?” If you then begin to skim the passage (stimulus) for the first reading, you will immediately see that finding the correct AC will require a logical deduction from the complicated conditionals in the passage. Since you will have to go back to the passage anyway to get the details that you need to work the required conditionals for the solution, you can save time by doing a close reading just once instead of twice.

I’m not sure that you can always safely eliminate three ACs before you do the actual deduction required. But even if you can’t, you still will save time by eliminating one time consuming reading.

Let us know how your method works out.

[cc.celina]

Poster above has it right - for some types of questions, this may be TCR.

However, for the vast majority of questions, don't go into an LR question planning on reading the stimulus twice (because often you won't have to), but do not be afraid to re-read the stimulus if you are not certain of the correct answer.

[PeanutsNJam]

In RC I think think they tell you to go back to the passage when you need to be because chances are pretty good that you won't remember everything. For LR reading the stimulus is short enough so that you can remember everything if you take your time to read it slowly and really understand what's going on. By reading it quickly and going back you 1) waste time havig to read it twice and 2) probably have a better chance of eliminating the right answer your first time through because you didn't read it carefully enough.

Happens to me. Costs me up to 2 questions per section.

[polobull]

I think you would be better off reading the stimulus thoroughly, then referring back as necessary, rather than skimming the first time. IMO, reading the stimulus quickly and not absorbing everything is a waste of time. One can not accurately attack the answer choices without a good grasp on everything that is going on.

This is good advice.

I tried skimming/reading question first for months. Switched to reading the stimulus thoroughly and first. Shaved five minutes off my total time per LR section with no decrease in accuracy.

[wanderlust]

I think you would be better off reading the stimulus thoroughly, then referring back as necessary, rather than skimming the first time. IMO, reading the stimulus quickly and not absorbing everything is a waste of time. One can not accurately attack the answer choices without a good grasp on everything that is going on.

This is good advice.

I tried skimming/reading question first for months. Switched to reading the stimulus thoroughly and first. Shaved five minutes off my total time per LR section with no decrease in accuracy.

That's huge improvement!
How thorough do you get in your first read? As thorough as Nova said, "absorbing everything"?
I think it's a bit overdo, trying to take in everything when reading the stimulus for the first time.
I think one only needs to understand the gist of it, grasping things like, conclusion, supporting evidence, counter argument

[DSman]

I don't even know why anyone would think you shouldn't re read. Yea its a problem if you have to re read every stimulus multiple times and you are consistently missing questions and running out of time. But for both RC and LR, if you have it narrowed down and you have to re read portions of the stimulus, of course you should do it. I'm pretty sure you are supposed to do it.

[polobull]

I think you would be better off reading the stimulus thoroughly, then referring back as necessary, rather than skimming the first time. IMO, reading the stimulus quickly and not absorbing everything is a waste of time. One can not accurately attack the answer choices without a good grasp on everything that is going on.

This is good advice.

I tried skimming/reading question first for months. Switched to reading the stimulus thoroughly and first. Shaved five minutes off my total time per LR section with no decrease in accuracy.

That's huge improvement!
How thorough do you get in your first read? As thorough as Nova said, "absorbing everything"?
I think it's a bit overdo, trying to take in everything when reading the stimulus for the first time.
I think one only needs to understand the gist of it, grasping things like, conclusion, supporting evidence, counter argument

I don't absorb everything; but that's because at this point I recognize that not everything is important. The conclusion, the premises, any unstated assumptions and the like, these things are now immediately apparent. I do not know if I would see these things so clearly if I hadn't spent so much time reading the question first and training my mind to seek the elements it asked me to find.

Skimming the stimulus, for me, was very counterproductive.

[polobull]

At this point I'd have to be in a coma to do worse than -2 on a LR section in a full 35 minutes.