Subscription pricing
deleted
PT Questions
crorosco02956
- Joined
- Apr 2025
- Subscription
- Live
crorosco02956
Monday, Sep 29
I was really hesitant on choosing C because the idea of a "trait" was hard for me to bring back to the stimulus. I guess let's say the trait AC C is implying is competitiveness ( outdoing others ) This competitiveness creates resentment and doesn't allow for the children to be happy THEREFORE Parents should not encourage their children to place great value on competitiveness. This completely bridges the premises to the conclusion. I chose AC A for my test AC and during BR chose AC B. In both I knew I wanted to bring back the idea of happiness to the conclusion but was really forcing the AC's to fit. AC A is advocating for a different stim than what were given- Who's to say that children when not outdoing others will happily be doing things that they do well... it's really a stretch. How do I know what they will or will not do well on? The stimulus certainly doesn't touch on this. AC B This is not a NA question nor does it connect to the conclusion, we're looking for a principle that further contributes to why Parents should not encourage their children to place great value on outdoing others.
crorosco02956
Edited Monday, Sep 29
How about the fact that we don't know if gyms and fitnesses are a "good source" to begin with? The stimmy only says gyms and fitness centers are "sometimes good places to buy used exercise machines" not that those places are good sources... That's how I figured out AC A wasn't the right one. AC C makes sense when describing the type of "place" even tho it sounds so redundant which swayed me to not pick it when I actually took the section.
crorosco02956
Friday, Mar 28
Something else to point out is that belief in the AC is very much needed, if not necessary, for it to be the right answer. The entire premises rely on "people's belief" which AC A appropriately addresses.
crorosco02956
Saturday, Sep 27
Misread A and thought it said "Parker has the assertiveness the task requires." BRb ya'll gonna slam my head against a wall
crorosco02956
Saturday, Sep 27
Honestly, I looked at (A) and I was like this can't be the correct NA because we don't know if no (so ZERO) tests out there, intended for diagnosing autism at an early age existed before the new test was made because the stimulus says that the new test for the first time "accurately diagnoses autism in children as young as 18 months old," so there could have been a test out there that diagnosed kids at an "early age" but it was just A-S-S. So the kids could be diagnosed but the test didn't diagnose them correctly. Aside from that.... for NA's it's always a good idea to keep in mind the conclusion--- that leads you straight to (B) your bare bones gotta be true answer. If any diagnostic test that sometimes provides false positive diagnostics (as the test in our stim does!) CAN'T provide a reasonable diagnosis (which is what our stim says (last sentence)) than the conclusion falls apart.
crorosco02956
Thursday, Oct 23
So interesting to me that there's not more than 2 comments on this question
crorosco02956
Thursday, May 22
This video helped a lot in understanding that C is a weakener bc it's essentially providing a control group and saying that in cities with soot and (essentially) no other air pollutants, ailment is (at least IF NOT MORE) high just like it was high in cities where there are large amounts of soot AND other air pollutants. I completely read this answer choice wrong and chose B. I guess we must prioritize the fact that even though it says "if true," if a conditional statement is an AC, then the sufficient clause still needs to be triggered by the stimulus
crorosco02956
Tuesday, Oct 21
I tried to chose the AC that was the least strong between D and E and ended up picking E, this was the only answer choice that I missed after giving the passage a thorough read... I think reading more and understanding differences/similarities in somewhat often used words (like supportive, optimistic, and unreservedly) would have allowed me to see that "strongly supportive" is a degree less strong than "unreservedly (superrrrr no doubt clear as day proud to be the proponent of this whatever it ends up being) optimistic."
crorosco02956
Monday, Oct 20
bruh I was like "who's to say action movies are popular??? can't make that assumption.." I need to save that thinking for q20+++!!
crorosco02956
Sunday, Oct 19
Big thing about B is that it's too generalized we're looking for an explanation in regards to this specific recent study, AC E is the obvious choice.
crorosco02956
Saturday, Oct 18
POE'd da hell out of this one. I couldn't even see what the issue was during BR lol I just knew AC stuck most to the stimulus and was most relevant
crorosco02956
Thursday, Oct 16
Having issue's accessing kevin's version.. anyone else?
crorosco02956
Wednesday, Oct 15
Did anyone else pick D until you realized there was no clause in the stimulus that satisfied the "If..." cause in the AC???
crorosco02956
Sunday, Jul 13
While the wording of this argument seems complicated due to it being about a science field, especially one I know nothing about, the statement role can be easily figured out by POE. I chose B because I lost sight of the conclusion/ what argument was saying. The argument is saying that the consensus could be interpreted in another way (pulsars may be made up of quarks) due to quickly reading answer choices I chose B again, in actual PT and BR. The only AC it could be would be AC A, supporting the idea that observed properties by astronomers could mean something else.
crorosco02956
Sunday, Jul 13
I hate that after looking at this question long enough, answer choice D is the one that makes the most sense. With POE you're left with D. I chose C because I couldn't understand what D was trying to do to the argument. So many assumptions for D but it's still a lot less (and more relevant) than the rest of the AC's
crorosco02956
Thursday, Dec 12 2024
So the last paragraph, "Most of Harry Potter's friends are wizards. Most people who are not his friends are not wizards. Therefore, Draco Malfoy, who is a wizard, is probably Harry Potter's friend." is invalid?
crorosco02956
Tuesday, Dec 10 2024
I will score 170+ goodluck everyone!!
crorosco02956
Friday, Oct 10
ain't no way they gave this to me on the 8min 45 sec drill :,) I only got to q4
crorosco02956
Wednesday, Oct 08
I was having the hardest time understanding this question. After some thorough review I now understand that A isn't the right answer because it's showing that since one's level of confidence (economist arg essentially) affects how one sees overall state of economy- this AC is essentially supporting the economist's conclusion that the media critics are wrong and that negative news reports don't harm the overall economy, it's actually people's own level of confidence that does. Whereas D is essentially equating that if people have little confidence on the overall economy then that means people then that causes them to negatively think of their own economic situation- which essentially flows with the argument. Maybe the negative news reports DO cause harm to the economy because when impacted with little confidence in overall economy (by negative news reports) people look down at their own situations SO MAYBE the support in the economist's argument just feeds into the the overall point in the critic's argument- essentially not proving that the media critics are mistaken.
crorosco02956
Edited Monday, Oct 06
I think the only real competition here is between AC A and B. I went with AC A when I was drilling but this doesn't have to be true. we know that talk therapy produces chemical changes in the brain and this this seems to correspond with improvements to the patient's behavior. It doesn't have to be true that all neurochemical changes spur psychological changes. Some chemical changes may spur psychological changes.... that is supported. "ALL" in AC A is wayyyy too strong.
Let's think about AC B here... we aren't given that much support from the premises to conclude that talk therapy may one day be as good as pills. We only have the correlation that the talk therapy leads to chemical changes and that in turn improves patient behavior but the conclusion is bit a stronger than these correlations. It's saying talk therapy due to these correlations will one day be as effective as PILLS. Effectively the argument is assuming a causal relationship between patient behavior and chemical changes. So CAUSE: Chemical Changes ----- EFFECT: improvements in patients behavior. This has to be true for the conclusion to flow. Edit: I also want to mention that pill therapy (pharmacological intervention) impacts the brain's neurochemistry we MUST assume that talk therapy (since it's being compared to pill therapy) is able to do this just as effectively so the conclusion works, AC B without a doubt gives us just that.
Explanation on elimination on the other answer choices:
AC C: Whether or not this is true or false bears no impact on the conclusion. From what we can tell in the stimulus- talk therapy has been effective at bringing about psychological change just not as effective as other methods (a.k.a. pills)
AC D: The second aspect of this AC is what throws me off... neuroscience as a subject is not mentioned in the stimulus and the goal isn't to make it so those two subjects are the same (or indistinguishable) irrelevant AC.
AC E: How much pill therapy or talk therapy costs was not mentioned at all in the stimulus, so the expense aspect of the therapies are completely irrelevant.
crorosco02956
Saturday, Oct 04
Honestly- just looking at the last sentence (and cutting out the unnecessary fluff in the beginning) it helps me see what the phenomenon is in the stimulus. For the life of me I was not sure what to explain in this stimulus... I guess rereading over the stim would have been most helpful since it explicitly asks to explain the researchers findings which ends up just being the last sentence.
crorosco02956
Edited Thursday, Oct 02
Looking back at this during BR- this question is so funny. I genuinely couldn't find the issue with this stimulus until I looked at the answer choices- so I wasted time reading it over again attempting to find a flaw but the second time around 1995 caught my eye. Once I saw D I was like yup what about earlier* than 1995? Reviewing it now I realize that Boris does a terrible job at answering George's question. George is asking why the did x get more popular in CURRENT TIMES (now) and Boris goes goes on to say because people are taking more classes and it's catching on... ok? but what SPURRED the uptick + how did it start? Most importantly WHY the change from the past to now. Was there a specific event/phenomenon?
crorosco02956
Wednesday, Oct 01
Takeaway: If you spot a gap in an argument that automatically becomes an assumption that is REQUIRED to make the conclusion work. 1. find the gap (control f and type in most relevant word in your pre-phase for me it was "accept") and move on. If you were to have negated this, this crushes the conclusion. You should feel okay clicking onto an answer choice that is "stronger" for NA if it is a gap in the argument, other times you just go for something a bit weaker that must be true.
I think the main reason why AC A is wrong is because we don't know if any of the people chosen for this test have medical conditions. So we don't know if it even applies to those the stimulus mentions.