Did no interpret "Many people hesitate to admit that their behavior does not conform to societal expectations." as lying about donating blood. I took it to mean that many people don't admit that donating blood does not conform to societal expectations of altruism--so they could've been donating blood for non-altruistic reasons like reducing one's own blood pressure, etc. For this reason chose C.

Maybe C would be correct if it said: "Some current laws regarding evidence are different from common-law doctrines." Todays modern laws allowing relevant evidence to be admitted can be different from the common-law doctrine of forbidding parties to a case from testifying---while still stemming/originating/DERIVING from this history of law.

A would be correct if it said "Scientific humanism is characterized by the attempts to describe and explain in both science and the humanities.

To make E the correct answer, could be changed to: Using lichenometry to date earthquakes is more useful in geographic regions where factors that disturb or accelerate lichen growth generally do not occur.

hate this passage

D) We only know that all upper level courses will have prereqs. ALL courses (necessary condition) don't have to have prereqs.

Could be /upper-level courses don't have prereqs

felt like to weaken this argument, treated more like a NA question to get to AC D

Draft convention in B would not like the legal agreement in A because it is not conforming to in situ preservation and commercially exploiting a UCH for sale which it finds incompatible with protection of the UCH, among other things. B would probably, like critics of for-profit archaeology, find Pass A's call for archaeological integrity questionable. An appropriate response by a representative of Pass A would likely need to absorb that criticism and address how it can better not violate the draft convention.

Chose D at first because it seemed to address the first bullet point in Pass B, "Accordingly, activities directed at UCH shall be authorized by the competent authority of the concerned State only when they make a significant contribution to knowledge, protection, and/or enhancement of UCH." The legal agreement includes the government of a sovereign state England. Liked because it made an exception for why Pass B draft convention doesn't apply to the legal agreement. But there's no support for why the legal agreement in particular doesn't fall within this rule. Like, WHENEVER a legal agreement like Pass A happens, the UNESCO draft convention doesn't apply? If anything, the draft convention could argue that because the activities in the legal agreement are not making a "significant contribution to knowledge, protection, and/or enhancement of UCH" by evidence of it selling off the coins, the activities directed at the sunken ship should NOT be authorized by its government.

@somanglee239718 good explanation!

Read the context a little before/after the referred sentence to fully understand what AC matches up best.

E is correct because if the people who donate money (16%) are separate from the people who are prepared to join (26%), their combined numbers could result in a joint slay of 42% which exceeds the historical precedent of 30% needed to be viable in the long term. Without E, we don't know if those donating vs joining are in overlapping sets--shrinks the overall proportion of people with the required support

Interested!

Chose B because of last paragraph that talks about introducing soil from land that been taken out of production, which contained fungi. These fungi are associated with later stages of natural soil development. Rationalized that the replacement topsoil would not be developed enough to sustain fungi. But this is not a good connection to the question stem because we are being asked about what is true of ANY soil, not this very specific kind of enriched soil. Also B is irrelevant because the stimulus doesn't talk about the amounts of fungi.

interested

@cappelldaniel400 Couldn't give myself a "what to watch out for next time" on this and this is a great explanation :)

Does anyone have takeaways on how to do better on questions like these in the future? I get people's explanations for why C is correct...just no idea on what advice to give to myself other than "you got the notable assumption wrong. it was wrong of me to assume that local codes would be more lenient than national codes. it's actually the other way around."

1) Question summary

-People who are allergic to cats are actually allergic to certain proteins found in animals' skin secretions and saliva.

-The particular proteins that will cause an allergic reaction varies among allergy sufferers.

- All cats are capable of provoking allergic reactions because all cats shed skin and spread saliva around their environment.

-But a particular cat can cause an allergic reaction in some but not all people who are allergic to cats.

2) Wrong reasoning - E

"There is no way to predict whether a given cat will produce an allergic reaction in a particular allergy sufferer."

I thought this mapped on well to the idea that a particular cat can cause an allergic reaction in some but not all people who are allergic to cats--so if you randomly put a cat in front of someone who was allergic to cats, you wouldn't necessarily know they would be allergic. As well, this could be well supported by the fact that the proteins that cause allergic reactions vary between allergy sufferers.

However, one could hypothetically run a test and find out which proteins a particular allergy sufferer responds to, and what proteins a particular cat has, so it could be possible to predict an allergic reaction.

"No way to predict" is too extreme for this stimulus.

3) Correct reasoning - C

"Not all cats are identical with respect to the proteins contained in their skin secretions and saliva."

This is supported because if cat allergy sufferers react to different proteins, and its common for a cat to cause allergic reactions in some but not other cat allergy sufferers, then it must be the case that not all cats have the same proteins. Hence, they do not incite the same allergic reaction across all cat allergy sufferers.

4) Lesson

For MSS questions, I will be careful of AC that are mostly supported except for the use of extreme language (no way, never, the only) in which you can find ways to discredit (maybe its more like sometimes)

Given author's perspective, which answer would the author most likely agree with. Answer is implied but needs strong support from text. Look into answer choices and do POE. Author's perspective in spotlight type passage is likely related to why they think the subject is significant.

Wrong Answer B Reasoning:

Last paragraph, author states that the despedida was a marker of the corrido's uniqueness, thought at least author would agree that corrido is unique.

Especially paragraph 2, author indicates that the author uses language, esp. metaphor, that incoprates imagery that is "readily recognizable to corrido listeners". P1 states that corridos use familiar linguistic conventions served to affirm the cohesiveness of Border communities--AKA the local audience.

However, being unique "among ballad forms" suggests that the corrido is unique/different from other ballad forms for using language familiar to locals. There isn't really a comparison made between corridos and other ballad forms. Could be that other regions might have other ballad forms that also use language specific/familiar to that region.

Correct Answer C and Reasoning:

Base author's POV in main point of the passage. P1, author states that corrido's relies heavily on familiar linguistic and thematic conventions in order to affirm the cohesiveness of the Border communities. Then goes on to talk about the components that make a corrido a corrido: P1 - content specific to the Border region, P2 - corrido told simply without embellishments, use of metaphor includes everyday familiar images and P3 carrido's despedida.

The despedida, while "perhpaps the clearest marker of the corrido's uniqueness", author spent the whole passage listing off several defining features of the corrido. Therefore, even if the despedida didn't survive, you could probably still identify as a corrido given it had these other traits.

Lesson:

For author's perspective questions where I'm asked to choose an answer that the author is most likely to agree with, orient yourself to the author's main point.

I have a habit of choosing answers that sound similar to the main point/authors POV because they contain some descriptively accurate elements (like key words) from parts of the passage, but when put all together, include something that is unsupported (i.e. "among ballad forms")

1) Question summary

Asks what can be inferred/implied from the passage overall, which means the answers have to be strongly supported by the text. Have to go to answer choices and do process of elimination

2) Wrong Answer & Reasoning - D

-Last paragraph talks about despedida, and in the beginning talks about how the corrido has some ready-made lines which is most evident in the corrido's formal closing verse of the despedida

-Last sentence says that in the despedida, the corrido's maker asserts that the task of relating an authentic Border tale has been accomplished

-Taken all together, thought that all corridos have a despedida that have the same role- and that the despidida being the best evidence of corridos "certain ready-made lines" meant that despedidas lines are ready made/the same

-However, even though all corrido's have a despedida and they have the same role, the lines in the despedida are variable. This is shown in the example of the despedida of the variant "Gregorio Cortez", where even lines within the despedida can change from version to version of this corrido.

-I think I was confused and thought that the despedida was the fourth line of the variant of Gregorio Cortez, instead of reading that the example provided was about the WHOLE despedida/"closing verse" (AKA collection of lines) and that this was just one version of the despedida in one version of the corrido of Gregorio Cortez

-In any case, the fourth line of a despedida, even if you interpreted this as being THE despedida, it doesn't stay the same across corridos because it is stating the subject of the corrido (which changes)

-Even though all corridos have a despedida, and some lines within a despedida are the same, it is not the case (or even likely) that the whole despidida (which has variable lines) is the same ACROSS MOST versions of the corrido

3) Correct Answer - C

Can find support in last paragraph.

In formal closing verse of corrido, of the lines within the despedida, "the first and third lines are a set of convention", meaning that these lines stay the same across corridos and their despedidas

4) What specific lesson can I take from this question?

-I sometimes get confused about what a term actually means because I don't pay close enough attention to how it is defined in context, its referential phrasing, and examples illustrating its meaning in the passage

-For example, I would have known that the despedida did not just mean the last line of a corrido if I had read it fully in context with sentence that said the despidedida is a closing VERSE (AKA containing multiple lines) and an example of a despedida of one variant of Gregorio Cortez which listed several lines and their respective functions.

@YaserRamadan that's what i thought but maybe that's too formulaic. either way the argument is concerned with polls being published around the time voters will make a decision

mapped this out crazy wrong so there was no hope of getting C lol

Ended up picking E in BR but how does it not fall into the same category of why A is wrong, of existing outside the domain of horror stories?

So A is wrong because "all descriptions of monstrous beasts" could be referencing non-horror stories about monsters....which stimulus doesn't talk about

Couldn't E "Some stories that employ symbolism" be referencing some non-horror stories that use symbolism?

Tried doing negation test since this is a necessary assumption question, but found myself getting more confused with what the AC was saying. Especially D, I negated to "No musicians have larger CC than do any nonmusicians"...which I interpreted as if that is true, then the premises fall apart because it denies that there even is a correlation between larger CC and musical training. But maybe this is a SA Q approach?

Can someone explain their approach for NA questions that don't rely on negation tests?

@MidoMashakel I also feel like research mentioned in Passage A has the same meaning as literature, the only catch being whether or not both were talking about plant control (which you point out they weren't).

AC A is the better answer because the only difference is that passage A says "furbearer" while Passage B says "furbearer mammal"....which those both fall within the category of "furbearing animals" in AC A

@angeliqueantonini01643 In the second paragraph, the people who use this plan who like it, will recommend it to others and get referrals for the firm: "Experience shows, the directors say, that if people are referred to a firm and receive excellent service, the firm will get three to four other referrals who are not plan subscribers"