I took a practice LSAT under timed testing conditions today. I did just fine (161) BUT I got more than half the Logic questions wrong (ulp! 11/26). I scored 20/25, 23/26 and 22/26 on the Reasoning, Reading Comp and 2nd Reasoning sections respectively.
I am a good test taker – none of the non-Logic Games sections took me the allotted 35 minutes. I finished them in approx 25 minutes, actually, and had time to review my answers and twiddle my thumbs for a bit.
I know what I am “supposed” to do on these questions – create a graph or visual representation that encompasses the givens – but found myself unable to hit on a chart that worked for me in the time alloted. The multiple variables had me a bit stumped.
I think I overthunk a few questions. For example in a given it said: If L then Not M and Not P. I was not sure at first if Not P then L (the converse) was true. In the world of logic it is assumed to be so, but in the world of real-life reasoning it isn’t automatically true. I probably spent 5 minutes evaluating the questions to infer if the converse was assumed to be true! What can I assume about the Givens going forward (converse, inverse, contrapositive? other?) Also, if a question offers a new given, is it “cumulative” – does it add to known knowledge about the situation – or does it only apply to that question?
In tests, like the GRE, where the “Analytical” is scored separately from the other categories of questions, I scored decently in that section (which in my view was much simpler than the one in the LSAT) compared to other test-takers (~75th percentile IIRC). This tells me that the majority of most people are at least as bad at these questions as I am. However, in the LSAT all questions are scored together, which is a big bummer for me. I desire to bump my score by approx 5 questions ON THIS SECTION. I am aware that there is no statistical difference between scores within a 3 point +/- band, but clearly I am lacking in this section compared to the others.
I am looking for suggestions and resources for improving this section specifically (not general test-taking advice). Thanks for all your input.
It’s been 5 or 6 years since I took the thing (gah!), so my games section advice is pretty general: I think the secret is practice, practice, practice. Do a lot of practice games, then do more, and analyze your answers in detail, whether right or wrong. Get to where you can still do them even when you get bogged down. Then chill, because most people seem to do comparatively poorly on the games section compared to the rest of the exam. I did well on the practice games questions I did while preparing, so I didn’t anticipate that section being a problem the way you’re doing, which was a mistake on my part. Consequently, I wasn’t as prepared for that section as I could have been and I didn’t do nearly as well on it as I had in practice (I ran out of time and had to completely guess on a few, which irked me greatly), but I aced most everything else and still made 90th percentile. Or 10th percentile, whichever was better. I forget.
If a question gives you two statements, that is equivalent to connecting them with an ‘and’.
Frogs are red.
Pigs can fly.
Is the same as frogs are red AND pigs can fly.
If you use real world reasoning, try and think of extreme examples. For your example, take L as “Tom died yesterday” and P and Q “Tom went to school today” and “Tom had cornflakes for breakfast today”. Make sure it makes sense to plug these into the statement you’re given, but also make sure that not P and not Q aren’t just rewordings of L - this isn’t helpful at all. P being “Tom is alive today” wouldn’t really help you see anything.
I don’t know if I’m reading you wrong, but in your example not P does not imply L. Why? Use my above events, that would mean that if Tom is not at school today, then he died yesterday. Clearly that doesn’t always follow - it could be the weekend. P would imply not L though. If Tom goes to school today, then clearly he couldn’t have died yesterday.
You might find it easier to read ‘If A then B’ statements as ‘A implies B’. I’m assuming you’ve not come across truth tables… that’s probably more complicated than what you need to know. Therefore the most useful ‘result’ I can tell you is that:
A implies B means that not A implies not B, and vice versa. It does not mean that B implies A.
That was a little unstructured, but I hope some of it is of use to you! But at the end of the day, as pravnik said, with anything of a mathematical nature (which this is, but don’t worry about it) it’s practice that counts most.
I did pretty well on all the sections but do not underestimate how much I hate this test. I think that the games can be mastered because they are usually (99% of the time) based on linear sequencing. I practiced these things so much that when I started reading the question, I would begin to draw the columns and lines of the diagram at the same time.
I think you got your second A and B backward. A implies B means Not B implies Not A. It doesn’t mean Not A implies Not B.
For instance if A = Tom died yesterday and B = Tom did not go to school today, then A implies B (If Tom died yesterday, he did not go to school today) and Not B implies Not A (If Tom went to school today, he did not die yesterday) but Not A does not imply Not B (Just because Tom didn’t die yesterday doesn’t mean he went to school today).
In this question (from the Oct 1996 test) when if L then Not P, P DID imply Not L. Can that possibly be correct, logically? I have an analysis od the question, and it specifically states
I took logic proofs in high school, but that was ahem getting on 15 years ago. It’s a little foggy in the ol’ brain. Thanks for all the input & comments.
My nightmare is that I get an experiemental Logic Games section. Having to do this twice will be exhausting.
I have blocked the LSAT out of my mind, but I recall buying the cheapest, thickest LSAT prep book I could find at the bookstore and doing all the exercises and practice tests in it.
I don’t remember my score, but it got me into several schools, one of which I managed to graduate from. So my only advice is to practice, as the books tell you to. Good luck.
More generally, this is one of the cases where a test book is going to help. You can sit down and inhale it, and - I’m sorry - the rote of recognizing a certain pattern in the question and knowing the right type of chart can really improve your score.
Best of luck. Please let us know how you do.
Ace, who did comfortably on the LSAT, by which he means his GPA became more or less irrelevant to the application process
Drill, drill, drill. And then don’t sweat it when you don’t do so hot; nobody does well on the logic games sections. But if your problem is an inability to figure out the proper graphing technicque for a given problem, that’s where drill can really help you. You can think long and hard without worrying about the clock on how to craft your solving strategy for any of a given type of question, and then you cna learn those strategies by heart. Then it’s simply a matter of figuring out which question requires which of your quiver of strategies, instead of having to reason from first principles every time.
Caveat: I took the GRE, but it’s similar enough for the purposes of this discussion.
Another vote for practice, practice, practice. And, when taking the test, taking the time to double-check your diagram before you calculate your first answer on any logic problem. Why do this? Because that critical check might allow you to realize if you’ve made a mistake in setting up your diagram, before you waste more time in answering the whole section. If time allows, also double-check your first answer before moving on to the rest – for the reason that the answers are typically cascading, with the first setting up the second, which is critical for answering the third, and so on. Get off on a firm footing with your diagram and first answer, and you’re on a good footing to get the rest of the answers right.
i second the practice, practice, practice. I used to love Games Magazine–until I took the LSAT. I still can’t stand that magazine now because a lot of the games still remind me of the LSAT.
My other recommendation is to take ALL of the time they give you–I caught several errors that way myself.
When I first started, the logic games portion of the test was my worst subject, but it ended up being my top score in the LSAT. I think it is the only area that one can significantly improve his or her score within a month.
After the LSAT, my advice to you is to drink heavily.
(and wait until you get to have REAL fun taking the bar… muhahahaha!)
The posters saying “practice, practice, practice” are correct.
But another key is to learn how to diagram well. Experiment with different ways of recording information - 2D grids, logical “IF / THEN” statements, spatial columns or lines, etc. Figure out what works well for you. Your ideal goal is to get to where The Highwayman got, being able to start to draw the proper diagram(s) immediately after reading the question.
However, in the LSAT all questions are scored together, which is a big bummer for me. I desire to bump my score by approx 5 questions ON THIS SECTION. I am aware that there is no statistical difference between scores within a 3 point +/- band, but clearly I am lacking in this section compared to the others.