Something that helped me in this scenario is to pretend to be the person responding. If I were talking to someone who said the stimulus, I'd likely respond with something like A. "Maybe magnetic fields are effective, but what if knowing they were there played a role and it wasn't just the magnets?" Something that pokes holes in the physician's support, like the placebo effect.
Honestly I feel like answer A isn't strong. It relies on the assumption that the patients in the two groups both know which group they're in., which I guess is a somewhat reasonable assumption but it doesn't seem too strong to me.
#feedback Please bring back the overview feature that lets you see the stimulus and the answer choices without listening to the video. I usually like to give these questions with lectures attached a try before listening so I can understand where my thinking could go wrong.
so if i keep getting questions right but my explanations are different than how he explains... am i doing something wrong ? his explanations just confuse me most of the time when i get the question right
Does anyone else wish that we could see all the answer choices first before seeing the correct one? Is there a feature I can turn on that will give me this? I feel like that would be a helpful way of practicing while watching videos.
#help I intuitively think that the correct answer would be E - about the different causes of back pain. Even after reading and listening to the explanation, I am hesitant to reject this answer choice. Could anyone provide their understanding of why this choice is wrong?
Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding something. Isn't the experimental framework the exact same method as phenomenon hypothesis framework? In this case the phenomenon that needs to be explained is why one group improved and one group didn't. The conclusion hypothesis says, "it's because of the magnets". A correct weaken answer would provide an alternative hypothesis which it does. It says, "maybe it's not magnets but the placebo effect".
How can we derive from the stimulus that the patients in both groups "knew" whether they got the treatment or not? Nowhere in the stimulus says that they both knew.
No other experiments have been done showing that magnetic fields reduce pain in any area other than the back.
/back→/reduce pain, therefore reduce pain→back. I think what answer says is that If magnets are to exert their pain-reducing magic, it's necessary for them to be applied to one's back. This leads me to the wrong answer choice.
0
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
52 comments
Something that helped me in this scenario is to pretend to be the person responding. If I were talking to someone who said the stimulus, I'd likely respond with something like A. "Maybe magnetic fields are effective, but what if knowing they were there played a role and it wasn't just the magnets?" Something that pokes holes in the physician's support, like the placebo effect.
Do words like "probably" and "some" in the conclusion make the conclusion more plausible?
Honestly I feel like answer A isn't strong. It relies on the assumption that the patients in the two groups both know which group they're in., which I guess is a somewhat reasonable assumption but it doesn't seem too strong to me.
#feedback Please bring back the overview feature that lets you see the stimulus and the answer choices without listening to the video. I usually like to give these questions with lectures attached a try before listening so I can understand where my thinking could go wrong.
are these type of questions only experimental?
Is E an example of the "Don't touch Goku" rule? (its best not to mess with the phenomenon?
Am I the only person having a hard time with this section due to over explanation?
can't "received no treatment" easily be interpreted as a patient having been given a placebo?
so if i keep getting questions right but my explanations are different than how he explains... am i doing something wrong ? his explanations just confuse me most of the time when i get the question right
In an experiment, would we always get a placebo?
How do you tell a difference between a question where you need to find an alternative cause or something like this?
Does anyone else feel like he explains a bunch of things that don't help us understand LR more clearly? Tons of jargon.
Does anyone else wish that we could see all the answer choices first before seeing the correct one? Is there a feature I can turn on that will give me this? I feel like that would be a helpful way of practicing while watching videos.
#help I intuitively think that the correct answer would be E - about the different causes of back pain. Even after reading and listening to the explanation, I am hesitant to reject this answer choice. Could anyone provide their understanding of why this choice is wrong?
Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding something. Isn't the experimental framework the exact same method as phenomenon hypothesis framework? In this case the phenomenon that needs to be explained is why one group improved and one group didn't. The conclusion hypothesis says, "it's because of the magnets". A correct weaken answer would provide an alternative hypothesis which it does. It says, "maybe it's not magnets but the placebo effect".
#help
How can we derive from the stimulus that the patients in both groups "knew" whether they got the treatment or not? Nowhere in the stimulus says that they both knew.
is there any way to see the answer choices before we start ? #help
No other experiments have been done showing that magnetic fields reduce pain in any area other than the back.
/back→/reduce pain, therefore reduce pain→back. I think what answer says is that If magnets are to exert their pain-reducing magic, it's necessary for them to be applied to one's back. This leads me to the wrong answer choice.