Subscription pricing
In LG, when given a question stem that provides a new premise AND includes the terms: could be true, must be true, could be false, and must be false, etc. I tend to take a lot more time than I should in trying to process the question. Usually, I am dealing with a game board that I split, so it takes me even longer to try to figure out the relationship between the question and the game boards that I have in front of me. I'm planning on drilling this particular skill, and was hoping someone could look over my notes:
Could be True: inference has to work in at least ONE of the game boards
Must be True: inference must be true in ALL the game boards
Could be False: as long as the inference could be wrong in ONE of the game boards, it's wrong
Must Be False: inference must be false in ALL the game boards
Cannot Be True: is this the equivalent of must be false???
I feel like JY addressed this in the CC, but can't remember exactly where. Also, are there any other terms that I missed?
Thanks in advance!
0
4 comments
For 3. I'm having a little trouble understanding, if in any of your gameboards something CBF then the thing you found qualifies as a CBF. Ie if X can't go in slot 3 in 3/6 gameboards, or even 1 gameboard, it CBF. Ya 5 is saying the same thing as MBF.
Ya I def agree with eliminating answer choices because if you cherrypick an answer you think is right, often if you just read the other answers you would see the clear and correct answer you need. On MBT questions I do cherrypick because on my gameboards if I can see a clear similarity between all gameboards that's probably the right answer but this does leave room for error sometimes.
Yes, it makes sense. Thank you!!! @emmorens932 This is exactly what I was looking for! Thank you for the feedback! @kashibrandi609-brandi
Hey! I think you may be referring to this lesson: https://classic.7sage.com/lesson/how-to-quickly-react-to-logic-games-question-stems-flashcards/
I think you have a pretty good break down already. As for the suggestion above, that's also a great way to attack the AC (think of it like LR where you look for 4 incorrect). Maybe start off with how you're understanding the question stem and as you become a little better try the suggestion above! You got this!
I'm not sure if this is what you mean, but I tend to look at them in opposites and I find it helps me understand what to look for a bit quicker...
For example: if something Could be True, I look for answers that Must Be false. This is because there is only one correct answer and we know it COULD be true, so the others have to be false by default. I find this method easier on my brain because there are more wrong answers than right and looking for a 'dime in the dozen' can be really overwhelming especially under pressure!
So for your MBT inference, for example, instead of looking at what MBT, try looking for what COULD be FALSE - if it could be false it definitely doesn't have to be true! Does that make sense? Hope this helped and good luck! :)