I think you compromise the blind review process by knowing your score. If you score above/below your range, you might look less/more hard while doing blind review.

I will sometimes BR one section, grade and review that section, then BR the next section. This might help a bit with what you're looking for.

"Sometimes I want to know what I got right after I finish an exam because what I was feeling during the test is fresh in my mind still and I can connect whatever score I got with the correlating vibes I had during the test, so it seems that scoring right after can provide "some" benefit."

You could write done your vibes or feelings while they're fresh in your mind and then do BR properly.

Your academic summary report on LSAC lists the mean GPA at your college and your percentile rank. This gives some indication of how difficult your school is and where you stand. Still, the major thing is a bit of mystery to me.

hoping for +3 instead of -3

A says allergies decreased in certain countries as # number children went down. The problem is this answer choice says nothing about allergies in children. It only talks about the country as a whole.

The strategy I used is to treat it like a strengthen or weaken question combined in one. If I knew the answer to what choice A is saying, would that weaken or strengthen the argument? If it does, then it will help evaluate the argument.

Can you give a bit more explanation as to why C is wrong? It seems the like the argument has a causal explanation i.e. an uncomfortable seat causes fatigue, or a poorly position seat causes poor visibility.

Good to know, thanks. So you bought the actual book to get the tests? Where did you get explanations for the answers? I was thinking about upgrading my 7sage account to get up to PT71 with explanation, but it's $200 vs ~$22 for the latest 10 Actual book.

Could you say a little bit more about why A is wrong. 26% chose A, including me but the video barely covered why it was wrong.

Doesn't choice D seem like it is denying the conclusion? I thought a weaken question had to attack the support the premises give to the conclusion.

Passage: The marks are probably the traces of geological processes...

Choice D: No, that's not possible

I chose B over C because B is clear that they were expecting one thing and didn't get it. C isn't clear that the diners were expecting master chef to be there. I hate the LSAT.

I used the same method too. This isn't the first PAI question I've fallen off track by using the yes/no/agnostic method.

The machine defeated the chess champion. This, Graham says, shows that chess can be mastered by machine. This statement supports the idea that Graham attributes the victory to the computer.

Hey Al, where are the rare LG games posted? I don't see it on the syllabus. Or is it a thread in the discussion you're talking about. Can you provide a link?

As many Pt as it takes to get the score you want. I don't think you should wait to start studying. Study now and take the test when you're ready. Apply to LS soon after that.

I use the study schedule feature to gauge how long it will take for me to finish my study plan.

Whether you'll be ready by September depends on what you're scoring now and how much time you have (are you working or going to school?). I agree with Nilesh above though. Take it when you're ready and not before.

I wish it was just more practice. This was my 15th preptest though. I do repeat the answer choices in my head, but the problem is that the letters B, C, D, and E all sound the same in my head. I've been transferring answers in groups. I finish two pages of the test (2 pages of LR or 1 game or 1 RC passage) and copy all of the answers. Should I fill in answers 1 question at a time?

Well, why do you think the explanations would overturn it?

Maybe you're confused by the first paragraph when it says rejecting the $1 offer does not match what theoretical economics would expect. This doesn't mean you're overturning an assumption (rational self-interest). You have only found something that initially doesn't fit in your theory.

Later in the passage the author gives reasons for why rejecting the $1 offer actually fits the description of rational self-interest. You want a reputation that is beneficial in the future.

I can see that answer choice E is a sufficient assumption, but I don't see why it's necessary.

(deny choice E)

Sometimes a reader believes a poem expresses a particular idea yet that idea is not part of the meaning of the poem.

Argument can survive if I add a different sufficient assumption such as:

The meaning of a poem is what the poem actually communicates, regardless of the author's intention.

The argument's conclusion still works I think. It can still be wrong to think that the meaning of the poem is whatever the author intends to communicate.

I don't understand the LSAC response about why there is no intermediate conclusion in this argument. Can someone else try explaining?

I chose choice A while taking this test, but I've figured out why it's wrong.

Choice A says: Only if ACI, AVD

same as: AVD → ACI

This is exactly the premise that JY shows in the video. And we all know that saying a premise is true or false doesn't affect the support relationship between premise and conclusion.

The first part of choice B screwed me: "If a TV show would be canceled unless..."

Allow the possibility that some shows that would be canceled unless X, and that for some shows, that this is not true.

This answer choice is restricted to talking about the first kind -- shows that would canceled unless X.

Yet the relevant TV shows in the passage seems to be different. It applies to all shows.