Pattern Recognition

anne2hoang

I’ve heard so many times that the LSAT is a test of pattern recognition. Some people define pattern recognition as anticipating or pre-phrasing answers. There are only so many possible wrong answers for each of the question types. Studying for the LSAT is similar to learning how to play chess. After a while, you can anticipate what moves your opponent will likely make.

What does pattern recognition look like for you?

vandyzach

The only two patterns I've noticed is that correct answers to necessary assumption questions are often very "soft". In other words, they don't go very far. Remember, it has to be NECESSARY, so an answer choice that fills the gap but goes to far is incorrect for a necessary assumption question!

The second pattern I've noticed is that "inference" questions (questions that do not contain arguments, but rather just statements, usually have a correct answer that combines two or more sentences/phrases in the stimulus, whether it involves formal logic or not. And incorrect answers to these questions often try to do this, but do so incorrectly (for example: the correct answer will be a contrapositive of a part of the stimulus, and an incorrect answer will be like a mistaken negation or something).

I have also heard that pattern recognition is important in LSAT studying. Unfortunately, these are the only two patterns I have noticed.

Anyone else noticed any?

anne2hoang

@vandyzach, I would like to add to that.

Necessary assumption, inference (MBT and MSS) and reading comprehension answer choices often use small language. Ex: Some, sometimes, not all, and not every. Strengthen and weaken questions like middle language. Ex: Most, often, many, and several. Sufficient assumption questions like big language. Ex: All, only, none, always, and never.

The correct answer choice for an inference question could be a
1) paraphrase of premise(s) 2) conclusion 3) contrapositive. For all inference questions, the answer must be supported entirely by the stimulus. Formal logic is often useful for MBT, but is rarely useful for MSS.

vandyzach

Oh wait got another one for you Anne! This one is not something that not alot of people focus on but I think is really important.

On RC, the last lines/sentences/clauses of the passage are usually REALLY IMPORTANT. Here's why I think this is:

The LSAT is trying to trip you up every chance they get. Even the easiest questions have some level of trickery to them (and obviously the harder questions are SUPER tricky). One way they can get you is by putting something really, really important at the end of an RC passage when 1. you are tired about reading about some boring subject and 2. you are likely to skip over it because you know in the back of your mind the LSAT is timed and you think you spent too much time on the passage and there's so many questions to go and...oh my goodness...look at the time! I need to get to the questions ASAP, so you end up flying through the last part of the passage and missing something important.

A great example is PT 39, passage 2. The last 2 or 3 lines of the passage really cement the author's view, which is the subject of about 5 questions that follow the passage.

PLENTY of other examples of this, too. That was just the most recent one I remember.

SoCal Japorean

Another aspect of pattern recognition is recognizing the different patterns of wrong answers and how to eliminate them in a quick manner in order to save time for harder Questions. IE. Recognizing scope shifts and common errors in conditional logic inferences.