I think we all have those sections! Don't be too discouraged -- if you can do well in other sections then you will be well on your way to a great score! Plus, recognizing what you have to work on is half the battle and you are already there! You got this :)

I had the same thought and treated this question more like causal logic. I went:

exact caffeine --> limit (/eliminate) --> many people --> better health. That led me to A without any doubt.

Here's the thing. You got the right answer, and, I'm assuming, the way you wrote your chain didn't allow for the other answer choices to corrupt it. That's great! That means you understood the question. I wouldn't overthink it. If you are worried, I would do a MBT drill on the hardest setting and see if you encounter the issue of incorrectly translating and go from there.

You got this!

You're doing amazing!! Thank you for this encouragement :)

Hi! I am currently at a 167 BR (163 without BR & trying to break into the 170s), I'd be down to review and study together -- right now I am just missing the "harder" and "hardest" questions and feel like I have a strong understanding of everything below that, so it could be awesome to improve my understanding by explaining questions and work together on those especially hard ones. LMK

Hi! I use the highlight tools and highlight details/key words while I'm reading. I also try to read the stimulus and ask myself "what is this not saying?" before I move on to reading the answer choices in order to avoid a possible trap. Finally, I only use process of elimination (not hunt) and if I get down to two convincing answers, I quickly skim over my highlights in the stimulus. This takes a bit of time, but I think the process becomes fast with practice and you can eventually stop manually highlighting. I hope some of that helps, you got this!

#feedback Since the "oldest mistake in the book" is mistaking a sufficient condition for a necessary conditions (right?) there should be a 3rd step to these practices of "what is the mistake?"

For example: Where the judges are independent there will be a good legal system.

JI --> GLS

/GLS --> /JI

What is the mistake? GLS --> JI

Defining the trap would help avoid it.

How important is it that my results are identical to the answers? For example, on #1, I used the wording of the example:

without P.E. --> H.D.

and then

/HD --> / without P.E.

The answer uses the "/" slash in place of the "without." So,

/(physical exercise) → health deteriorates.

Are both right? Is it best to keep original wording?