The test is learnable and from reading your post you are determined to get the score you want. Good luck!! :)

PT 1.S3.Q23.

A bit of an odd question stem. Stem is asking what is the best evidence that the journal's decision will have desired effect? Desired effect is the increase in readership for the medical journal. The journal's decision is to introduce a new format based upon a questionnaire. I think this clears up the stem confusion that may happen when coming across a question like this.

Before we head into the answer choices, let's remind ourselves that we are looking for an answer choice that supports the fact that introduction of a new format will result an increase in readership. This can be our implied conclusion from the info gathered in the stem and the stimulus. Okay, let's go.

A) okay so 90% of the readers returned the questionnaire. But how does this support the fact that the new format will increase readership? This makes no impact to the conclusion.

B ) This is irrelevant. We are not concerned with other journals.

C) Exactly. This provides some support to the fact that the introduction of the new format will result in an increase in readership. Since the % of people who like the format change are almost same as the % of potential readership who want the format to change, then it is likely that the introduction of the new format will result in an increase readership. For example, if 65% of people like the format change and 63% of potential readership want the format change, then it is likely that introducing a format change will result in an increase in readership.

D) This is irrelevant information. We are not concerned with cost.

E) This does not provide support to the fact that introduction of new format will result in increase readership. This answer choice is concerned with readers who were dissatisfied and satisfied with the old format and how many of them returned their questionnaires. But remember, we want to support the introduction of the new format which results in increase readership. This answer choice does nothing.

PT1. S4.Q08

A bit of an odd stem again but I am sure these types of question do repeat on other PTs. Just not sure about the frequency of these type of questions. Anyways, the question stem tells us Jack Jordan has misinterpreted something by Mary Simms. We want to know what Jack Jordan said and what Mary Simms said and then figure out the disconnect between the two.

So, we know Mary concludes Billboards are the basis of our business (outdoor advertising companies). Jack says the attractive community is the basis of our business (local merchants). Jack misinterprets "our" because he thinks that Mary is including his business when she concludes Billboards are the basis of our business. However, she is using "our" to describe the businesses of outdoor advertising companies.

A) Not misinterpreted. Similar usage for both.

B ) Not misinterpreted. Similar usage for both.

C) Jack misinterprets this.

D) Not misinterpreted. Similar usage for both.

E) Does not misinterpret damaged.

Let me know what you think.

A) No such explicit or implicit claim was made in her argument that allows us to believe this to be true. No exaggeration of the negative evidence in Pedro's argument. He gives a statistic to support his conclusion.

B ) Exactly. Maria is indicating that Pedro reaches a broad conclusion from inadequate evidence about cloth diapers. She mentions the negative environmental consequences of cloth diapers indicating to Pedro that there is negative evidence about cloth diapers too (that he fails to include in his argument). Since Pedro concludes that people should stop buying disposable diapers and use cloth diapers, Maria's added evidence about cloth diapers indicates Pedro draws a broad conclusion from evidence pertaining only to disposable diapers.

C) Does not happen.

D) Maria is not taking a side over another but merely adding negative evidence about cloth diapers. The last sentence mentions diaper services which could be applied to both types of diapers.

E) Does not happen

Another reason to eliminate E would be to classify the answer choice as a "no impact". I considered the first sentence to be the main conclusion and the last sentence to be the intermediate conclusion / major premise in support of the main conclusion. With that in mind, answer choice E has no impact to the main conclusion since the main conclusion does not specifically mention the teachers enthusiasm. We are trying to support the idea that we should not be enthusiastic for calculators when doing math. To say that the teachers enthusiasm is disproportionate to the effectiveness of calculators gives no support to such an idea.

To consider some sort of impact to the conclusion, we would need to assume that the enthusiasm mentioned in the main conclusion is about teachers. But in the second sentence we are told that teachers observations were positive about calculators - allows students to focus on general principles rather than tediously writing out the math calculations. It would not be a common sense assumption to connect teachers enthusiasm to the main conclusion where enthusiasm has a wider scope.

Let me know what you think.