Help with "X can be completely determined if" questions.

[martingreyell]

Hello,

I'm having problems with one reoccurring question type on sequencing problems: "X can be completely determined if." Two examples are on pages 1-109 Q3 and 1-111 Q4 (of the test prep textbook):

1-109 Q3:
"The salary rankings of each of the nine partners could be completely determined if which of the following statements were true?"

1-111 Q4:
"The composition of each class can be completely determined if which one of the following pairs of students is known to be in the level 2 class?"

My main problem is that I don't really know where to start, and I often find that I am spending too much time setting up a diagram and thinking about the problem. These questions seem fairly unique compared to the others, and any help would be appreciated!

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Martin,

Thanks for the question! Those are Justify questions, and the preview you are seeing of them now will be followed by a deeper exploration later. First, you'll encounter the basic Justify idea in LR lessons 4 and 5. Then, you'll see LG examples in class that will raise a discussion of how to solve them in.

In the meantime, here are some thoughts on how these questions work:

To solve a Justify question, the first step is to carefully analyze the result that is specified in the question stem. Because producing this final result is your goal, in a sense you have to work backwards in order to determine which answer choice will produce that result. This process typically centers around which variables are the most powerful (the variables that have the greatest impact on other variables) and which spaces are the most restricted (spaces with more restrictions are often at the center of question solutions). The second step involves analyzing the answer choices to determine which is most likely to create the type of limitations that will result in the desired outcome. While in theory this may sound easy, in practice these questions can be quite difficult. In part, this is because the question is “upside down:” in normal questions, information from the question stem has certain effects, and then you choose the answer that reflects one of these effects. In Justify questions, the answer choices create the effects, and the result is the one specified by the question stem.

By the way, one recurrent type of incorrect answer choice has been an answer that could create the desired outcome, but does not have to create the outcome. For example, in a question requiring a variable to be forced into a certain space, an answer might result in a variable that could go in that position but could also go elsewhere, and in that case the answer would be incorrect.

Please let me know if that helps, but the good news is that this is only the start of you seeing questions like this. Thanks!

[Jon Denning]

To quickly piggyback on Dave's reply above, let me provide you (and anyone else who reads this) with links to two blog posts that further explore Justify questions:

http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/underst ... -questions

http://blog.powerscore.com/lsat/bid/253 ... ifferences

Those should both help as you continue to explore this interesting question type!

[martingreyell]

Hi Martin,

Thanks for the question! Those are Justify questions, and the preview you are seeing of them now will be followed by a deeper exploration later. First, you'll encounter the basic Justify idea in LR lessons 4 and 5. Then, you'll see LG examples in class that will raise a discussion of how to solve them in.

In the meantime, here are some thoughts on how these questions work:

To solve a Justify question, the first step is to carefully analyze the result that is specified in the question stem. Because producing this final result is your goal, in a sense you have to work backwards in order to determine which answer choice will produce that result. This process typically centers around which variables are the most powerful (the variables that have the greatest impact on other variables) and which spaces are the most restricted (spaces with more restrictions are often at the center of question solutions). The second step involves analyzing the answer choices to determine which is most likely to create the type of limitations that will result in the desired outcome. While in theory this may sound easy, in practice these questions can be quite difficult. In part, this is because the question is “upside down:” in normal questions, information from the question stem has certain effects, and then you choose the answer that reflects one of these effects. In Justify questions, the answer choices create the effects, and the result is the one specified by the question stem.

By the way, one recurrent type of incorrect answer choice has been an answer that could create the desired outcome, but does not have to create the outcome. For example, in a question requiring a variable to be forced into a certain space, an answer might result in a variable that could go in that position but could also go elsewhere, and in that case the answer would be incorrect.

Please let me know if that helps, but the good news is that this is only the start of you seeing questions like this. Thanks!

Thank you very much! I went back to the questions I previously mentioned and attacked the answer choices with "could be true" versus "must be true" in mind, and it worked quite well. I found that by reinforcing the aforementioned idea in my head I was much less likely to choose answer that looked desirable, yet was incorrect.

[bk1111]

Hello - this is a question I have too. I find myself burning a lot of time on these questions. Most recently, for PT 38 G3, Q16, I spent almost 3 minutes on the question, ending up skipping it because I could not find a scenario which completely determined the departments. Looking at that question specifically, can you suggest how I can go through the answer choices expeditiously?

My strategy for these questions is usually try each answer choice, unless I really have a hunch about which variables would help me figure out the entire game. Thank you in advance!

[Dave Killoran]

Hi BK,

Can you remind me of what materials of ours you have? There are different sections in both the course and LGB that address how to strategically attack these A full rundown is beyond what I can post here, but I can direct you to review them elsewhere, however!

Thanks!

[bk1111]

Hi BK,

Can you remind me of what materials of ours you have? There are different sections in both the course and LGB that address how to strategically attack these A full rundown is beyond what I can post here, but I can direct you to review them elsewhere, however!

Thanks!

Hi, I have both the bibles and workbooks. Thank you!

[Dave Killoran]

Awesome, thanks! Have you checked out pages 497-503 in the LGB? That's where I cover Justify question strategy in the LGB. I'd like you to look at that first, then let's come back to this. Sound ok?