Am I just crazy or does LSAC reuse stimuli Forum

[Kimikho]

Pretty self explanatory. I'm too lazy to look back through and find the specific questions, but I feel like I have seen the same stimuli with different stems. Is that true? I haven't taken the LSAT yet and I haven't done the Indian ones so it's not like I'm seeing stems from February/an experimental section/India.

[Cambridge LSAT]

Older LR sections (up through PrepTest 39) include some dual-question stimuli. Since the two associated questions are generally of different types, you'll find them in separate places when drilling by type.

[elterrible78]

I'm pretty sure I have seen this a couple times, actually, so I don't think you're crazy.

[ThetaX]

For a fact older Preptests reuse stimuli and just change the stem/answer choices.

[rebexness]

I just always assumed it was different parts of the same article. Its especially noticeable when you do a lot of drilling at once.

[Jeffort]

For a fact older Preptests reuse stimuli and just change the stem/answer choices.

No they don't, at least not the way you might be thinking they do.

Up until '98 or '99 some LR questions appeared on tests where there were two questions based on the same stimulus. In those cases the two questions were right after each other in the same section with the stimulus only printed once for both questions.

When you work questions from sources where they are not printed in the full sections they were originally administered in, it is common to run across a familiar stimulus with a different question attached than you saw before when it came from a twofer on an older test. Those double question ones just end up split apart in sorted by type compilations such as Cambridge packets so that when you see the same stimulus again it has a different question and set of answer choices attached since the two questions are different types. Each of those was originally part of a double question stimulus on a test. LSAC has never repeated the exact same stimulus in a different section or different test, it just seems like that when you drill by type and don't see the twofer together as it originally was. Double question stimulus use hasn't happened since either '98 or '99, it's a relic of the past.

[Rollontheground]

^ That's interesting.

I feel like I've also seen very similar stimuli from questions that weren't two-parters, nearly identical with different numbers or names or something. So I agree — not crazy.

[rebexness]

^ That's interesting.

I feel like I've also seen very similar stimuli from questions that weren't two-parters, nearly identical with different numbers or names or something. So I agree — not crazy.

I used to always get these questions wrong because I was looking for the "answer I had already seen" vs reading the actual stim/ACs.

[Rollontheground]

^ That's interesting.

I feel like I've also seen very similar stimuli from questions that weren't two-parters, nearly identical with different numbers or names or something. So I agree — not crazy.

I used to always get these questions wrong because I was looking for the "answer I had already seen" vs reading the actual stim/ACs.

Definitely happened to me once or twice.

[Kimikho]

^ That's interesting.

I feel like I've also seen very similar stimuli from questions that weren't two-parters, nearly identical with different numbers or names or something. So I agree — not crazy.

I'm pretty sure I have seen this a couple times, actually, so I don't think you're crazy.

woooo

I definitely feel like some of them are not two-parters, but the two parters one makes sense. I didn't know they had gotten rid of those.