Just in case this helps anyone: for me, the key word was "boosting" i.e. to increase the motivation. Hence, why I chose E, since it mentions the ability to increase their motivation.
i relied on grammar very little with this question and just used the skills i learned from identifying weak arguments and assumptions. not sure if that's a logical route but i got it right loll.
I think the advice about breaking down the referentials is extremely helpful in dissecting the question stimulus. I will also say something that helped me understand this better was to refer back to the lesson about assumptions when filtering through each answer choice. The fewer and more reasonable assumptions each answer choice made the more logical it seems. Which made it pretty easy to eliminate down to answer choice E because it made the fewest assumptions and was worded in such a way that it only used language previously stated in the stimulus.
I got this question, but it took me 2:25 (+1:13). My problem was mostly to understand what they actually mean those answer choices from A to E. Will this be eventually better with practice? Any advice please?
@Temporubato Don't worry about it! There's a whole section of Flaw questions waiting for you down the road (be warned lol.)
BUT I can help with a quick preview of how I do flaw questions (if it helps!)
Think of the hole in the stimulus.
FIRST AND ALWAYS FIRST, I look for the conclusion
"These corporations' use of motivational posters is unlikely to achieve its intended purpose."
The kernel of the stimulus is that "some" corporations put up posters to boost motivation. And "most" of "these (the corporations that put up posters) are already motivated. With these premises, the author concludes that these corporations will not boost employees' motivation through posters.
The author is pretty much saying, "Posters boost motivation, but since your employees are already boosted, the posters won't boost motivation." When you put it this way, the flaw becomes clear: Posters could boost motivation even more, and employees go brrrrrr.
Identifying the hole is the best and fastest way to answer a question, but it takes a lot of practice! But you got this!
Think "Which one of the answer choices, if true, would weaken/absolutely RKO the argument?"
SAME THING, I look for the conclusion
"These corporations' use of motivational posters is unlikely to achieve its intended purpose."
A: Think "It's true that the stimulus fails to consider whether corporations that do not currently use motivational posters..."
We stop here since the stimulus is only concerned with the corporations that DO put up the posters.
B: "It's true that, with respect to their employees' motivation to work productively, corporations that decorate their halls with motivational posters are representative of corporations..."
We stop here since the issue at hand isn't representation. The stimulus argues that boosters won't boost morale.
C: "It's true that even if motivational posters do not have one particular beneficial effect for corporations, they may have similar effects..."
We stop here since we only care about boosting morale, not other effects.
D: "It's true that employee productivity is strongly affected by factors other than...
We stop here since we only care about the posters boosting motivation, not the productivity of these employees themselves.
E: "It's true that even if employees are already motivated to work productively, motivational posters may increase that motivation."
This is the correct answer. Other than the process of elimination, if motivational posters can increase motivation regardless of an employee's current motivation level, it contradicts the author's argument that posters won't increase motivation.
This method is more time-consuming and is more of a backup plan if you have already skipped this question and are returning to it after doing all the other ones. You also need to be very sensitive in understanding each answer choice and eliminating the incorrect ones.
TLDR: Don't worry about "flaw" questions now, worry about them later! However, my two methods for dealing with "flaw" questions are either to identify the holes and search for the correct answer (faster but more challenging) or to consider "which answer, if true, destroys the author's conclusion?" (slower).
Hope my brain-rot Michael Reeves-esque explanation helps!
@SidneyCallaghan Do not worry about your timing. Focus on developing the skills into second nature, and being precise. Eventually you will be able to slowly constrict timing until you are at your desired speed. Foundation over speed.
While solving this question, I got overwhelmed thinking about do I have to know the premise/conclusion? What about the modifiers? What about the subject/predicate? Where are the referentials? The modifiers? But given the time limit on a real LSAT, I recognize that it may be not possible to analyze all of this. I know that it has to be intuition but when I stumbled upon this question I didn't quite know where to start. I read the paragraph and understood it but didn't know how to approach it.
What would be the best way to study for questions? How would I know by just looking at this question that it is a question focused on referentials? Should I start by analyzing all of the steps I mentioned above and take some time before it becomes automatic?
@kittenWhiskers I wouldn't say this question is focused on referentials, just that referentials can help you identify the correct answer. I think the best way to study questions is to really take your time to understand the stimulus and all the answer choices. Based on how overwhelmed you were by this question, I think it would be beneficial to break down the stimulus by identifying the subject (including the noun and modifiers), the predicate (including the verb, object, and any modifiers), and referentials. I think that if you're overwhelmed by this question, it's more important to take the time to train your brain to automatically identify all these components before worrying about timing. Answering questions quickly is not beneficial if you get them all wrong because you didn't understand what the stimulus was presenting or what the answer choices were offering. Take your time to really understand everything, then work on your timing when you feel more confident.
For all of these LSAT practice questions, my first answer is always wrong and then my second answer is almost always correct. How do I fix my gut instinct?
Got it right, but man, it took me forever to get there, 8 mins. Sure, I haven't actually sat down and studied in months (a bad habit I have, but I also work paving highways so I am exhausted most days), I also realized that I cannot be in a room with a TV blaring and studying these. I had to constantly stop and reread because Phineas and Ferb were screaming at me facepalm.
I got this question correct but it took me long to figure out. I think the habit of referring back to the referents in the clauses help to hammer home what information the author precisely brings up in a clearer way since it can remind you while you're reading.
I caught the referential phrase, but I selected A because it sounded like the right answer. I think I may have been nervous about the time. During the blind review, I realized that I completely forgot the argument of the passage because I was focused on capturing the referential phrase. I understood that the passage was only referring to those particular corporations who use motivational posters, but I still somehow got sidetracked.
I think it's important to keep the main thing in mind. By doing so, efficient analysis of the passage may be achieved without over focusing/worrying about identifying indicators. I got so caught up in identifying the indicators that I forgot to remember what the premise and conclusion were.
I will say studying the referential and grammar parsing really helped me with getting this answer correct. If you properly parse the sentence and identify the referential every answer is eliminated but one!
84 comments
Hi,
Just in case this helps anyone: for me, the key word was "boosting" i.e. to increase the motivation. Hence, why I chose E, since it mentions the ability to increase their motivation.
That’s very smart! thanks
@heugene15659 yesssss! okay THIS was helpful...BOOSTING! Motivation could have a limit, and the goal is to BOOST it!
I had this question on a PrepTest and got it wrong there... then ended up seeing it here and got it wrong again. Agony.
i feel like i stuggle to understand what the actual question itself is asking us to look for in many lsat practice questions.
Trying to assume on these questions will be my downfall. Only focus on what the question is asking and only. DONT ASSUME!!!!!
Got this one wrong twice. Still have much to learn.
i relied on grammar very little with this question and just used the skills i learned from identifying weak arguments and assumptions. not sure if that's a logical route but i got it right loll.
@mnv449 same. For me the grammar complicated the question.
That was the quickest question that I, Me, Mwah, the future attorney, just answered lol.
@Kawayllc I love the way you said this lol!
I think the advice about breaking down the referentials is extremely helpful in dissecting the question stimulus. I will also say something that helped me understand this better was to refer back to the lesson about assumptions when filtering through each answer choice. The fewer and more reasonable assumptions each answer choice made the more logical it seems. Which made it pretty easy to eliminate down to answer choice E because it made the fewest assumptions and was worded in such a way that it only used language previously stated in the stimulus.
I got this question, but it took me 2:25 (+1:13). My problem was mostly to understand what they actually mean those answer choices from A to E. Will this be eventually better with practice? Any advice please?
@Temporubato Don't worry about it! There's a whole section of Flaw questions waiting for you down the road (be warned lol.)
BUT I can help with a quick preview of how I do flaw questions (if it helps!)
Think of the hole in the stimulus.
FIRST AND ALWAYS FIRST, I look for the conclusion
"These corporations' use of motivational posters is unlikely to achieve its intended purpose."
The kernel of the stimulus is that "some" corporations put up posters to boost motivation. And "most" of "these (the corporations that put up posters) are already motivated. With these premises, the author concludes that these corporations will not boost employees' motivation through posters.
The author is pretty much saying, "Posters boost motivation, but since your employees are already boosted, the posters won't boost motivation." When you put it this way, the flaw becomes clear: Posters could boost motivation even more, and employees go brrrrrr.
Identifying the hole is the best and fastest way to answer a question, but it takes a lot of practice! But you got this!
Think "Which one of the answer choices, if true, would weaken/absolutely RKO the argument?"
SAME THING, I look for the conclusion
"These corporations' use of motivational posters is unlikely to achieve its intended purpose."
A: Think "It's true that the stimulus fails to consider whether corporations that do not currently use motivational posters..."
We stop here since the stimulus is only concerned with the corporations that DO put up the posters.
B: "It's true that, with respect to their employees' motivation to work productively, corporations that decorate their halls with motivational posters are representative of corporations..."
We stop here since the issue at hand isn't representation. The stimulus argues that boosters won't boost morale.
C: "It's true that even if motivational posters do not have one particular beneficial effect for corporations, they may have similar effects..."
We stop here since we only care about boosting morale, not other effects.
D: "It's true that employee productivity is strongly affected by factors other than...
We stop here since we only care about the posters boosting motivation, not the productivity of these employees themselves.
E: "It's true that even if employees are already motivated to work productively, motivational posters may increase that motivation."
This is the correct answer. Other than the process of elimination, if motivational posters can increase motivation regardless of an employee's current motivation level, it contradicts the author's argument that posters won't increase motivation.
This method is more time-consuming and is more of a backup plan if you have already skipped this question and are returning to it after doing all the other ones. You also need to be very sensitive in understanding each answer choice and eliminating the incorrect ones.
TLDR: Don't worry about "flaw" questions now, worry about them later! However, my two methods for dealing with "flaw" questions are either to identify the holes and search for the correct answer (faster but more challenging) or to consider "which answer, if true, destroys the author's conclusion?" (slower).
Hope my brain-rot Michael Reeves-esque explanation helps!
If i work through this question exactly like this, how am i ever going to finish this test in time???
@SidneyCallaghan Do not worry about your timing. Focus on developing the skills into second nature, and being precise. Eventually you will be able to slowly constrict timing until you are at your desired speed. Foundation over speed.
sounds like Lumon Industries
My exact thought. “Hang in There”!!
While solving this question, I got overwhelmed thinking about do I have to know the premise/conclusion? What about the modifiers? What about the subject/predicate? Where are the referentials? The modifiers? But given the time limit on a real LSAT, I recognize that it may be not possible to analyze all of this. I know that it has to be intuition but when I stumbled upon this question I didn't quite know where to start. I read the paragraph and understood it but didn't know how to approach it.
What would be the best way to study for questions? How would I know by just looking at this question that it is a question focused on referentials? Should I start by analyzing all of the steps I mentioned above and take some time before it becomes automatic?
@kittenWhiskers I wouldn't say this question is focused on referentials, just that referentials can help you identify the correct answer. I think the best way to study questions is to really take your time to understand the stimulus and all the answer choices. Based on how overwhelmed you were by this question, I think it would be beneficial to break down the stimulus by identifying the subject (including the noun and modifiers), the predicate (including the verb, object, and any modifiers), and referentials. I think that if you're overwhelmed by this question, it's more important to take the time to train your brain to automatically identify all these components before worrying about timing. Answering questions quickly is not beneficial if you get them all wrong because you didn't understand what the stimulus was presenting or what the answer choices were offering. Take your time to really understand everything, then work on your timing when you feel more confident.
Context, Premise, conclusion highlighted. Then its barbeque chicken from there.
@besrawi Tyler Kolek, the hero of New York!
Got it right! Used logical reasoning from arguments lesson :D
@MRod Likewise, put simply the other choices were too convoluted to make any sense.
Doesnt make any Fing sense
@Aidan.lang This is supposed to be an easy question the F?
got it right but took me WAY too long
@dgeter Same here. It actually felt "too easy to be right" for me and I wasted so much time second guessing because I thought there was a catch.
I got it right this time! I am so proud of me and you guys too!
It helps if you read the question first. Then read the stim. I dont know it always works. Its been super helpful for me.
For all of these LSAT practice questions, my first answer is always wrong and then my second answer is almost always correct. How do I fix my gut instinct?
Got it right, but man, it took me forever to get there, 8 mins. Sure, I haven't actually sat down and studied in months (a bad habit I have, but I also work paving highways so I am exhausted most days), I also realized that I cannot be in a room with a TV blaring and studying these. I had to constantly stop and reread because Phineas and Ferb were screaming at me facepalm.
was stuck between D, and E but for the blind review I got it right. note to self: READ SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY. Smh
I got this question correct but it took me long to figure out. I think the habit of referring back to the referents in the clauses help to hammer home what information the author precisely brings up in a clearer way since it can remind you while you're reading.
This is a great explanation.
I caught the referential phrase, but I selected A because it sounded like the right answer. I think I may have been nervous about the time. During the blind review, I realized that I completely forgot the argument of the passage because I was focused on capturing the referential phrase. I understood that the passage was only referring to those particular corporations who use motivational posters, but I still somehow got sidetracked.
I think it's important to keep the main thing in mind. By doing so, efficient analysis of the passage may be achieved without over focusing/worrying about identifying indicators. I got so caught up in identifying the indicators that I forgot to remember what the premise and conclusion were.
I will say studying the referential and grammar parsing really helped me with getting this answer correct. If you properly parse the sentence and identify the referential every answer is eliminated but one!
i second guessed myself and ended up getting it wrong </3