The Best Answer Choice to Guess on the LSAT

LSAT Blog Best Answer Choice GuessBecause there's no guessing penalty on the LSAT, you should fill in a bubble for every answer.

I recently analyzed the LSAT PrepTest Answer Keys from several different angles.

This blog post contains my findings.

I'll start off with my most-significant findings, which you will find useful.

The rest of the blog post is the data I've analyzed, along with some less-significant findings.

Most of that data isn't too useful, but it's there if you want to look at it and obsess over the details. If you have an amazing memory, you might want to note some of the more specific findings, but the "most significant" ones are probably enough for 99% of people reading this to remember.



Most-Significant Findings

1. Overall, D is most likely to be the correct answer on the LSAT, and E is the least likely to be the correct answer.

Looking at every released PrepTest answer key from June 1991-December 2009, D is 2.1% more likely than E to be the correct answer.

(However, the variation in likelihood of each letter being the correct answer has grown less extreme over time. Looking only at the answer keys for the last 10 years, D is only 1.7% more likely than E, and over the last 5 years, D is only 1.26% more likely than E. That's still a significant-enough difference to be worth knowing, though.)


Take-away:
When guessing randomly between a few choices, if you haven't eliminated D, choose D. Don't choose E when you're down to a few choices and can't decide between them.

If you have to randomly fill in bubbles, choose D.

***
2. In the last 5 answer choices of a given section, D is more likely than others to be the correct answer. A is the least likely.

Take-away:
When guessing randomly on any of the last 5 questions in a section, if you haven't eliminated D, choose it. Whatever you do, don't choose A if guessing randomly.

If you run out of time and have to randomly fill in bubbles, choose D. The probabilities vary depending upon the section type, so feel free to look at the data below if interested in the nitty-gritty.



Answer keys from every released PrepTest, from the past 10 years, and from the past 5 years:

Using answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest (June 1991-December 2009):


D = 21.2%
B = 20.5%
C = 20.1%
A = 19.2%
E = 19.1%


Using answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 10 years (June 2000-December 2009):

D = 21.2%
C = 20%
B = 19.8%
A = 19.6%
E = 19.5%


Using answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 5 years (June 2005-December 2009):

D = 20.8%
C = 20.2%
B = 19.8%
A = 19.8%
E = 19.5%



Answer keys by section from every PrepTest, from the past 10 years, and from the past 5 years:

Logic Games

Not too much in the way of useful trends here.

Using Logic Games answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest (June 1991-December 2009):

B = 20.5%
E = 20.3%
D = 20.1%
C = 19.9%
A = 19.3%


Using Logic Games answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 10 years (June 2000-December 2009):

C = 20.6%
A = 20.4%
D = 20.3%
E = 19.5%
B = 19.2%


Using Logic Games answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 5 years (June 2005-December 2009):

B = 22.1%
C = 20.9%
E = 19.8%
D = 19.2%
A = 18%



Logical Reasoning

In Logical Reasoning, B and D have consistently been the most likely correct answer choices overall, over the past 10 years, and over the past 5 years.


Using Logical Reasoning answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest (June 1991-December 2009):


D = 21.6%
B = 20.6%
C = 20.3%
E = 19%
A = 18.6%


Using Logical Reasoning answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 10 years (June 2000-December 2009):

B = 21.2%
D = 21.1%
C = 20.1%
E = 19.3%
A = 18.3%


Using Logical Reasoning answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 5 years (June 2005-December 2009):

D = 21.2%
B = 20.1%
A = 19.9%
C = 19.7%
E = 19.1%



Reading Comprehension

While D and B have been the most likely answer choices overall in RC, B has shifted to become the least likely answer choice over both the last 10 years and the last 5 years. A has risen to become the second-most common answer choice over this period.


Using Reading Comprehension answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest (June 1991-December 2009):

D = 21.5%
B = 20.1%
A = 19.9%
C = 19.8%
E = 18.6%


Using Reading Comprehension answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 10 years (June 2000-December 2009):

D = 22.3%
A = 21.3%
E = 19.6%
C = 19.1%
B = 17.7%


Using Reading Comprehension answer keys from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 5 years (June 2005-December 2009):

D = 21.3%
A = 21%
C = 20.3%
E = 20.1%
B = 17.3%


***

Looking at the last 5 answer choices per section:


Using only last 5 answers from every released LSAT PrepTest section (June 1991-December 2009):

D = 22.1%
E = 21.3%
B = 20.2%
C = 18.8%
A = 17.7%



Using only last 5 answers from every released LSAT PrepTest section over the past 10 years (June 2000-December 2009):

D = 21.4%
B = 21.4%
E = 20.4%
C = 19.4%
A = 17.5%


Using only last 5 answers from every released LSAT PrepTest section over the past 5 years (June 2005-December 2009):

B = 22%
D = 21.3%
E = 20%
C = 20%
A = 16.67%



Please note that there is a great deal of fluctuation when looking at the last 5 answer choices per section by section type. This is likely due to the fact that we're working with a very small sample size (in the hundreds, which is very few questions compared to the number of LSAT questions overall - nearly 6,500 in total).

Logic Games

Using only last 5 answers from only the Logic Games section in every released LSAT PrepTest (June 1991-December 2009):

A = 22.5%
D = 20.3%
B = 20.3%
E = 19.4%
C = 17.5%


Using only last 5 answers from only the Logic Games section in every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 10 years (June 2000-December 2009):

D = 22.7%
B = 22%
A = 20.7%
C = 18%
E = 16.7%


Using only last 5 answers from only the Logic Games section in every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 5 years (June 2005-December 2009):

B = 25.3%
D = 24%
E = 20%
C = 16%
A = 14.7%



Logical Reasoning

Using only last 5 answers from only the Logical Reasoning section in every released LSAT PrepTest (June 1991-December 2009):

E = 23.3%
D = 22.7%
B = 19.5%
C = 19.5%
A = 15%


Using only last 5 answers from only the Logical Reasoning section from every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 10 years (June 2000-December 2009):

B = 23.1%
E = 21.7%
C = 21.1%
D = 19.7%
A = 14.4%


Using only last 5 answers from only the Logical Reasoning section every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 5 years (June 2005-December 2009):

C = 22.7%
B = 20.7%
E = 20%
D = 19.3%
A = 19.3%



Reading Comprehension

Using only last 5 answers from only the Reading Comprehension section in every released LSAT PrepTest (June 1991-December 2009):

D = 22.8%
B = 21.3%
E = 19.1%
C = 18.8%
A = 18.1%


Using only last 5 answers from only the Reading Comprehension section in every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 10 years (June 2000-December 2009):

D = 23.3%
E = 21.3%
A = 20.7%
C = 19.3%
B = 19.3%


Using only last 5 answers from only the Reading Comprehension section in every released LSAT PrepTest over the past 5 years (June 2005-December 2009):

D = 22.7%
B = 21.3%
E = 20%
C = 18.7%
A = 17.3%


Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding.

Photo by johnwardell / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Chances of Same Answer Choice in a Row on the LSAT

LSAT Blog Same Answer Choice Row ChancesLooking through the LSAT PrepTest answer keys, I found only 9 instances in modern LSAT history (June 1991-December 2009) where the same answer choice appeared 4 times in a row.

2 of these instances occurred in the same LSAT section.

Now, you might have thought LSAC artificially increases the number of 4-in-a-rows to throw test-takers off - to make them second-guess themselves. However, it appears that LSAC artificially decreases the number of 4-in-a-rows. (I've explained the math supporting this below.)

First, why am I even talking about this?

1. To remind you that it's possible to have 4 of the same answer choice in a row - even for it to happen more than once in the same section.

2. To tell you that if you have 3 of the same answer choice in a row and have to randomly guess on the next question, you may want to consider guessing something other than that letter simply because LSAC appears to purposely avoid 4-in-a-row.

Of course, focus on the content of the exam above all else. Patterns and probabilities should always come second to content. However, it's still useful to be aware of them for random guessing purposes.

Note: Since the cat's now out of the bag, it's possible that LSAC may change its strategy. Don't blame me if your exam's answer key has a 4 in a row or two, but if the 64 released PrepTests are any indication, there probably won't be a single 4-in-a-row.

Cases of same letter 4-in-a-row:

PrepTest 8 (June 1993), LR1, Q4-7 - answer C
PrepTest 12 (October 1994), LR1, Q11-14- answer D
PrepTest 14 (February 1995), LG, Q13-16 - answer D
PrepTest 19 (June 1996), LR2, Q18-21 - answer C
PrepTest 22 (June 1997), LG, Q6-9 - answer B
PrepTest 22 (June 1997), LG, Q20-23 - answer E
PrepTest 24 (December 1997), LG, Q18-21 - answer E
PrepTest 36 (December 01), LR2, Q18-21 - answer B
PrepTest 45 (December 04), LG, Q7-10 - answer A


If anyone's interested in the math behind all this:

Actual occurrences where a section contained at least one sequence of 4 in a row in the 64 released LSATs = 8

Chances of (at least) one 4-in-a-row in any particular section = ~16.2%

# of sections one would expect to contain (at least) one 4-in-a-row in the 64 released LSATs = 41.472
(4 sections per exam * 64 exams) * 16.2% = 256 * 16.2% = 41.472, which is over 5 times the actual number of occurrences.

The odds of finding 4 questions in a row with the same answer is (1/5)^3

This is because, given some answer for a question, the odds that the next question will have that same answer is 1/5. Then the odds that the 3rd question will also have that answer is 1/5 and finally the odds that the 4th question will too have the same answer is also 1/5. By multiplying, you find that for a set of 4 questions each with 5 possible answers, the odds of them having the same answer is 1/5 * 1/5 * 1/5 = (1/5)^3

Statistically, 1 out of every 125 sets of 4 questions (if the answers were truly random) would have 4-in-a-row of the same answer choice.

Thus, the odds of a set of 4 questions NOT having the same answers is: 124/125

Because there are 22 sets of 4 questions in an LSAT section (questions 1-4, 2-5, 3-6…22-25), we calculate the odds that for all of those sets of 4 questions, no set share the same answers: (124/125)^22 = 83.802464%

This means that the odds of at least one of those sets of 4 questions having all the same answer is 1-.83802464 = 16.197536%

There have been 256 individual sections of the modern LSAT given. In theory, approximately 16.2% of those sections should have contained at least one string of 4 questions with the same answers. 256 * .162 = 41.472, we’ll round that down to 41 sections that should have contained a string of at least 4 questions with the same answers (statistically speaking of course).

(I said above that there are 22 sets of 4 questions in an LSAT section because there are 22 possible sequences of 4 in a section of 25 questions. Sure, there are many sections that have a greater or lesser number of questions per section, but let's assume those differences cancel each other out.)

Bottom line: There appears to be a conspiracy to decrease the number of 4-in-a-rows.

***

Discussion of the two 4-in-a-rows in PrepTest 22's Logic Games section:

If you've done a few Logic Games, you may have noticed that LSAC often presents the content of answer choices in either alphabetical or numerical order.

I find it curious that in PT22, LG, Q20, the answer choices are presented in reverse alphabetical order, leading to a 4-in-a-row sequence of Es.

Call me crazy, but I'm entertaining the possibility that this exception to the traditional alphabetical presentation of choices was intentional in order to create 2 sequences of 4-in-a-row in the same section.

There have been 256 LSAT sections, so it's not that unlikely that we'd see a case of 2 4-in-a-row sequences in the same section by now. However, given the sketchiness of the reverse alphabetical ordering in PT22, LG, Q20, I'm calling foul play.

***

Cases where girls named Becca were likely to freak out:

PrepTest 16 (September 1995), LR2, Q13-17 - BECCA
PrepTest 44 (October 2004), LR1, Q1-5 - BECCA
PrepTest 57 (June 2009), RC, Q12-16 - BECCA


Actual occurrences where a section contained at least one sequence of BECCA in the 64 released LSATs = 3

Chances of at least one BECCA in any particular section = .67%

# of sections one would expect to contain (at least) one BECCA in the 64 released LSATs = 1.7152
(4 sections per exam * 64 exams) * .67% = 256 * .67% = 1.7152, which is pretty close to the number of actual occurrences


The odds of finding a particular 5-letter sequence is (1/5) ^ 5 = 1/3125

Statistically, 1 out of every 3125 sets of 5 questions (if the answers were truly random) would have a particular 5-letter sequence.

Thus, the odds of a set of 5 questions NOT containing a particular sequence is: 3124/3125

Because there are 21 sets of 5 questions in an LSAT section (questions 1-4, 2-5, 3-6…22-25), we calculate the odds that for all of those sets of 5 questions, no set contains a particular 5-letter sequence: (3124/3125)^21 = 99.330146%

This means that the odds of at least one of those sets of 4 questions having all the same answer is 1-.99330146 = .669854%

There have been 256 individual sections of the modern LSAT given. In theory, approximately .67% of those sections should have contained at least one particular 5-letter sequence the same answers. 256 * .67% = 1.7152, we’ll round that up to 2 instances where sections that statistically should have contained a string of at least one instance of BECCA.


(I multiply by 21 because there are 21 possible sequences of 5 in a section of 25 questions. Sure, there are many sections that have a greater or lesser number of questions per section, but let's assume those differences cancel each other out.)

# of sections containing (at least) one particular 5-in-a-row sequence one would expect over the course of 64 LSATs = (4 sections per exam * 64 exams) * .67% = 256 * .67% = 1.7152. Round that to the nearest whole number, and we get 2, which is 1 fewer than the actual number of occurrences. Nothing shocking or scary about that.

***

Bottom line: If the answer choices spell your name, don't freak out. If the answer choices spell the word "DEAD," don't freak out. This sort of thing can, and does, happen.

Photo by unloveable / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

5-Month LSAT Study Guide / Plan

Also see the 5-Month LSAT Study Schedule: Premium Day-By-Day Version.

5 months is PLENTY of time if you stick with a regular, but moderate, schedule. I've reviewed all books and PrepTests mentioned below in my best LSAT prep books post.

This schedule is intense. Follow it only if you're studying for the LSAT full-time, or if you're able to study for several hours each weekend. You might have work/school/life obligations that make this impossible. If that's the case, skip some of the "re-do" and "review" weeks, and complete the rest at a more relaxed pace.

Month 1:
Review my relevant articles on Logic Games and complete this list of Logic Games from PrepTests 52-61 ordered by difficulty during the first 4 weeks.

Week 1: Complete Pure Sequencing, Basic Linear, and Advanced Linear games. Review each game that gives you trouble.

Week 2: Complete Grouping: In-Out / Selection, Grouping: Splitting, and Grouping: Matching games. Review each game that gives you trouble.

Week 3: Complete Combination games in PrepTests 52-61 (untimed).

Week 4: Complete several timed sections of Logic Games from older exams, and read A Rulebook For Arguments.


Month 2:
Week 5: Review my articles on Logical Reasoning before completing LSAT questions of each type in PrepTests 52-61 using the LSAT Logical Reasoning spreadsheet (untimed). Complete a few timed sections of Logic Games.

Week 6: Continue Logical Reasoning work from Week 4 with additional question-types and complete a few timed sections of Logic Games.

Week 7: Continue Logical Reasoning work from Week 4 with additional question-types and complete a few timed sections of Logic Games and Logical Reasoning.

Week 8: Continue Logical Reasoning work from Week 4 with additional question-types and complete a few timed sections of Logic Games and Logical Reasoning.


Month 3:
Week 9: Read my articles on Reading Comprehension and complete several sections of Reading Comp from PrepTests 52-61 (untimed). Complete a few timed sections of Logic Games, Logical Reasoning, and Reading Comprehension.

Week 10: Catch-up and review week. Re-do the Linear / Sequencing games from PrepTests 52-61. Try to solve them more quickly and make new inferences. Complete timed sections of all types.

Week 11: Catch-up and review week. Re-do the Grouping and Combination games from PrepTests 52-61. Try to solve them more quickly and make new inferences. Complete timed sections of all types.

Week 12: Catch-up and review week. Re-do the Logical Reasoning questions from PrepTests 52-61 that gave you trouble. Complete timed sections of all types.


Month 4:
Week 13: Complete the 3 tests in LSAC's SuperPrep (timed) and review the explanations. Although the explanations are really technical, it's good to learn how the test-makers think. Identify weak areas.

Week 14: Re-read my articles on Logic Games and Logical Reasoning about question-types still giving you trouble. Complete a recent LSAT PrepTest under timed conditions. Review.

Week 15: Use my Logic Games categorization and/or Logical Reasoning spreadsheet to do question-types in older exams that still give you difficulty. Review. Complete another LSAT PrepTest under timed conditions. Review.

Week 16: Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests under timed conditions as 4-section exams. Review each exam on alternating days.


Month 5:
Week 17: Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests (timed). Splice in sections from another to simulate experimental sections. Review each exam on alternating days.

For the remaining weeks, use these free Logic Games Explanations, these video explanations, and these other LSAT explanations after completing the relevant exam.

Week 18: Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests (timed). Splice in sections from another to simulate experimental sections. Review each exam on alternating days.

Week 19: Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests (timed). Splice in sections from another to simulate experimental sections. Consider using one section to create a 6-section exam for extra practice. Review each exam on alternating days.

Week 20: Complete 3 recent LSAT PrepTests (timed). Splice in sections from another to simulate experimental sections. (Again, consider using one section to create a 6-section exam). More thoughts on how to simulate the experimental section in this article. Review each exam on alternating days.

Finally, rock the LSAT on Test Day.

LSAT Diary: Starting Practice Tests Timed

LSAT Blog Starting LSAT Practice Tests Timed
If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Leave her some encouragement below in the comments!

Law School Dreamer's LSAT Diary:

Week 6
This week I have busily prepared for four final exams and one final paper. I am ashamed to say, I have dedicated zero hours to my LSAT preparation. But I have dedicated approximately 30 hours to final exam preparation. At one point, I was actually lying in bed trying to go to sleep and actually feeling guilty about going to sleep and not studying the LSAT.

I still have to decide whether or not it is best for me to defer until the October administration. I am not yet to the point of feeling that all hope is lost, especially because next week I can completely devote 100% of my time to LSAT studying, and the following week, while I will be taking classes for summer session, I will have more free time than I did during the spring semester.


Week 7
Completed 2 PrepTests. Spent one entire day at a prospective law school.

Two weeks ago I took the October 2003 practice test and was thrilled to have scored six points higher than my initial diagnostic. I took it under timed conditions and included an additional section to simulate the “diagnostic section.” This week, I took the June 2005 test and scored right back down to my initial diagnostic of 143, and I did not include a fifth “experimental” section. I literally burst into tears. I have to determine whether I should defer my LSAT administration to October.

What is most disappointing to me (and probably most others who invest a substantial amount of time studying for the LSAT) is when you put in the time and feel as though you’re not making progress, or worse yet, moving backward. Once I calmed down a bit, I reassessed my PrepTest. I remember feeling so proud of myself while I was taking it under timed conditions that I had finished each section, often with time to spare. But this meant I was sacrificing quality for quantity and clearly it did not pay off.

I also question if I should not have jumped right in to taking timed practice tests. I have often felt that instead of learning as I go, I was too focused on rushing to learn the techniques and skills. Putting myself under the pressure of the stopwatch made me feel as though I had no time to learn a strategy. I wish I had come to this realization before now.

So I sat down and took another (but untimed) practice test – the October 2004 test. I did not care how long it took me; I just let time slip by. I scored each section upon completion so that I could critique myself while that section was still fresh in my mind. I also wrote notes to myself about why I thought one answer was correct over the other answer choices. When I missed an answer choice I forced myself to either verbally or in writing explain to myself why it was incorrect.

I think sometimes it is easy to trick ourselves into thinking we comprehend something when really we do not; we just breeze over it without full comprehension. Anyway, five hours later, I scored a 155. I’m not thrilled about that score, but I learned a lot. I don’t know how indicative that is of my full potential. My end goal has always been to score a 160, so even still I’m 11 raw points away from that.

Another regret I have is that I jumped into taking the PrepTests before I fully learned the strategies. I really do need to spend more time focused on reading and learning new strategies – all I am doing by taking PrepTests with high expectations under timed conditions before I’m ready is frustrating myself.

Again, I wish I had come to these realizations WEEKS – scratch that – MONTHS ago. The LSAT is a few short weeks away. I have to decide if I want to pass on the June administration date until October. I have a lot of apprehensions about this for a variety of reasons; mainly that I will have even less time to devote to LSAT studying in the fall, the fact that I want to get this over with, plus I wanted to send my applications out in September and October and if I wait until the October administration, I will not receive my score until November.

This week I visited one of the law schools that I am extremely interested in. I asked about their admissions process and was told if I send my application in before I have a reportable LSAT score, the file will not be reviewed until my file is “complete” (LSAT score included). I asked about the methodology in how the admissions committee examines applicant’s files. The answer surprised me, but I guess it should not have.

Basically, as soon as several hundred files are complete (or at least enough that merits attention by the admission committee), the files are ranked by GPA and LSAT (I could not get an answer as to which one GPA/LSAT). The highest ranked numbers go at the top of the pile, the lowest on the bottom and the committee continues to grant admission until they run out of acceptances to give. I was told they grant 500 acceptances a year. The following 600-700 applicants/files in line will likely be waitlisted. And sadly, if an applicant is 700th in line on the list of files it is likely their file will never even be looked at.

Talk about a numbers game! Imagine putting forth the effort to put together an application, personal statement, etc. (not to mention the steep application fee) and you are never given the time of day. Talk about disappointment. Plus you never knew whether the admissions committee ever looked at your file (and dinged you) or never touched it (still dinged you). I honestly can’t say which would upset me more. At least the admissions representative who gave me the tour was brutally honest and even referred to the admissions process herself as “a total crapshoot.”

On a happier note, I did gain entry to the building and test room (really a giant auditorium) where I will take my LSAT. I must say, it is pretty intimidating looking in on an auditorium that would likely seat 800 people. I was surprised to see the itty bitty flip-up style desks which aren’t even large enough for a single page of paper. At home, I had been studying using my entire desk and in the tunnel I’m sitting in a restaurant-style booth so test day will be very different.

Keep your fingers crossed for me!

Photo by wallyg

LSAT Logic & Greenpeace's Campaign to Green Apple's iPod

LSAT Blog Logic Apple iPod iPhone Spoof Greenpeace
When you become more logical, you won't only start to see more flaws, weaknesses, and gaps in the arguments of those you disagree with.

You'll also start to see them in the arguments of those you do agree with. Call it a cost of doing business.

I recently came across Greenpeace's campaign to "green" Apple. It's a few years old, but it's still worth looking at. Greenpeace's argument contains several shaky assumptions, examples of faulty reasoning, and more.

Before environmentalists start getting all up in my grill, please note:

I'm down with the environment, trees, polar bears, and all that other good stuff. It's possible to analyze the shaky reasoning of people with whom you agree without attacking their ultimate conclusions. In fact, by doing so, you can help them to make better arguments in the future.

***

Let's focus on the iPoison and iWaste sections of the Greenpeace campaign site, starting at the beginning:
Apple just doesn't prioritize environmental concerns. Sure, they have a nice Environment section on their website. But it's not linked from the front page, and it's hard to find unless you know where to look.
If you threw in a few more multi-syllabic words, you'd have a beautiful LSAT Logical Reasoning stimulus.

The first sentence is the conclusion, the second is a counterpremise, and the final two-part sentence is the evidence.

Today, Apple does link to its Environment page from the homepage (on the bottom right). Let's assume that it didn't back in 2007.

Does not linking to something on your homepage mean that you don't prioritize it?

Not necessarily. There are only so many things a company can link to on its homepage before it starts to become overwhelming. Think Yahoo vs. Google a few years ago. Who won that battle?

As for something "being hard to find unless you know where to look," what happened to doing a general web search for the terms "Apple Environment?" Seems like a pretty obvious action to take if one is interested in Apple's position on the environment.

I'm willing to bet that apple.com/environment ranked pretty high for that search a few years ago, and it ranks #1 today.

A principle that, if valid, would justify Greenpeace's argument is:
If a company doesn't feature a link on its homepage to its page regarding a particular topic, then the company must not prioritize that topic.
***

Greenpeace goes on to say:

What a good Apple looks like

Take the example of the toxic plastic Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC). Other companies have set a date to remove PVC from their products. Apple hasn't. Major new product lines like the iPod nano and MacBook still contain PVC.

We want all new Apple product ranges...to be free of the worst toxic chemicals in the production process and products themselves.
The first paragraph talks about PVC, and the second paragraph talks about "worst toxic chemicals." An assumption here is that PVC is one of the "worst toxic chemicals." (This shift in terms from one part of the argument to another is very common in Logical Reasoning stimuli.)

Does Apple's inclusion of PVC in its products make it a "not-good Apple?" Not necessarily. There might be other terrible chemicals Apple doesn't include in its products that the "other companies" do.

Finally, what does setting a date for the removal of toxins have to do with actually removing them?

Does setting a date for the removal of toxins guarantee the company will remove them by that date? Of course not.

Is it possible for a company to remove toxins without specifying a particular date? Of course.

If one knew that a company must set a date for doing something in order to actually do it, then setting a date would be relevant, and Greenpeace would have more of a justification for criticizing Apple for not setting a date.

Finally, let's pretend that Greenpeace said, "Other companies have publicly set a date." (which is probably what they actually meant, since it's more difficult to say whether there were internal (and undisclosed) targets and timetables for removing PVC.

This opens up our options a bit more - we now have publicly setting a date, privately setting a date, and not setting one at all.

We can now start thinking about whether publicly setting a date makes one more likely to perform an action than privately setting one. Of course, it might seem that way at first glance, but we can't really say without evidence.

LSAC likes to play on these types of preconceived notions. See PrepTest 31 (June 2000), Section 2, Question 19 (page 93 in Next 10) for an example.

***

Greenpeace continues:
Product take back

A basic environmental principle is that if you make and sell a product you should be responsible for that product when it is no longer wanted. This is also a basic rule for children: you clean up your own mess.

Dell and Hewlett Packard (HP) both support this principle, which goes by the very grown-up name of Individual Producer Responsibility.

If that principle in the first sentence is valid, then Apple should take back its products after consumers are finished with them.

The second sentence is offered as evidence for this principle; the author is making an analogy. However, there's a serious problem with this analogy:

Whose mess are all the unwanted electronics? The electronics are obviously wanted by someone when they're first produced and purchased, so it's difficult to make the argument that they're Apple's "mess" at that time. Isn't it really the consumer who stops wanting the product? If that's the case, then it's the consumer's mess, and the consumer should clean it up, according to the "basic rule for children." When viewed in this light, the argument contains an inherent contradiction.

If Greenpeace wanted to salvage this portion of the argument, it should instead advance the principle that the producer of a product, not the consumer, is responsible for their ultimate disposal/recycling.

The third sentence, the one about Dell and HP, is meant to support the principle's validity. The author is making the: "If your competitors jump off a bridge, then you should do it, too" argument. Mom wouldn't be proud.

***

I'll leave off there. However, the point is that there's a lot we can analyze from just a few paragraphs on the Greenpeace website.

See anything else there worth examining? Leave a comment!

***

Here's a somewhat-related analysis of Greenpeace's general criticism of Apple.

Photo by brian-fitzgerald / CC BY 2.0

The June LSAT Test Date is on a Monday?

LSAT Blog June Test MondayAs I mentioned recently, the June LSAT is the only LSAT that's regularly held on a Monday. In October, December, and February, the LSAT is held on a Saturday. (Sabbath observers can always take it on weekdays.)

Test-takers are usually happy that the June LSAT is unique because it's the only exam that starts at 1PM, rather than at 9AM.

However, one blog reader recently wrote to me:

Today, I was looking at my registration, and I swear that I had registered for Saturday, but the test is on a Monday. I am really annoyed, since this is not very accommodating for working professionals like myself. Is it normal that all WORKING people have to take a Monday (vacation day) to take the test? Sorry to vent!

I suggested:
You could always email LSAC from several pseudonymous email accounts. I estimate it would take 20,000 emails to get them to change the date of the June exam.

What do you think?

Will those of you in the 9-to-5 grind be complaining to LSAC about the injustice of having to use a vacation day?

Will those of you working the retail/service industry grind be thanking LSAC for allowing you to take it on a day off?

Leave comments!

Photo by meddygarnet

Barron's LSAT Prep Book Review

Barron's LSAT Prep Book ReviewI recently read the Barron's LSAT prep book after Barron's asked me to update it for the next edition.

Unfortunately, the book needs to be completely rewritten from cover to cover.

Most of the following book review is adapted from an email I sent to Barron's after reviewing the book.

In case anyone's wondering, I won't be updating the Barron's book, and I don't recommend that you use it.

(By the way, Barron's folks, I'm not ungrateful. I do appreciate the offer. It's just that you guys just aren't willing to go far enough in breaking out of the mold you've been using for the past several years.)

It appears that Barron's is trying to live off its reputation from many years ago. A few decades ago, Barron's was a big name in test prep.

Of course, this was back in the days when there were few test prep courses and competing books.

Test-takers often used the Barron's books exclusively when preparing for the New York State Regents exams and the SATs.

However, the rise of Kaplan and others the test prep market upped the standard of readiness for standardized tests.

This led to an accompanying increase in the sophistication of available test preparation materials.

I found that far too much space in the Barron's book is devoted to mock LSAT questions and their explanations.

Far too little space is devoted to appropriate strategies and techniques.

The questions, explanations, strategies, and techniques seemed virtually identical to those from previous editions of the book. Much of the book seemed geared to the pre-June 1991 LSAT. (LSAC gave the LSAT its modern format in June 1991.)

Barron's is stuck in the Stone Age.

LSAC has released over 60 actual LSAT exams.

There's no need to include hundreds upon hundreds of fake (non-LSAC-written) LSAT questions - unless, you want to puff up the book's page count (689).

The non-LSAC written questions in that book do not adequately represent real LSAT questions in the slightest. If you gave me a list of Barron's LSAT questions mixed with LSAC-written LSAT questions, I could easily tell you which were which (and that's not only because I've seen every LSAC-written LSAT question before).

When I told this to Barron's, they said they'd be happy to "let" me rewrite the questions.

I learned how long it takes to write LSAT questions from scratch when I wrote my own Logic Games. I don't feel like writing hundreds of LSAT questions from scratch when a publisher could just license the questions from LSAC.

***
Fake questions not realistic / modern, strategies lacking / not useful

Some question-types covered in the book don't appear on the modern LSAT at all.

-Take the sample questions from "Author Information or Author's Purpose" and "Word Reference." These just don't feel like real LSAT Logical Reasoning questions.

Additionally, some types of questions (and distinctions between types of questions) are left out altogether.

-Particularly, there is no distinction made between necessary assumption and sufficient assumption questions. These two question-types require significantly different analyses. The author lumps them together under "Assumptions..." and devotes only pages 101-105 to this question-type. Even worse, most of those few pages is devoted to sample questions and explanations rather than discussion of the question-type in general.

This common question-type deserves more attention in a 689-page book.

***

Exams included aren't new, despite the claims on the cover

The two real LSAT exams included in the Barron's book are very old - PrepTest 12 (October 1994) and PrepTest 14 (February 1995). These are not "two recently given LSATs" as the back cover states (unless you consider 15+ years ago to be recent). Nor are these exams the "most up-to-date review and practice tests currently available" (as the front cover states).

Every section of the LSAT has significantly evolved since that time - there are now 70+ released exams.

Most students reading the current edition of Barron's LSAT will eventually discover that the real (and modern) LSAT is much different from both the non-LSAC questions written by the author and from the older LSAT PrepTests included in the book.

Only someone who's brand-new to the LSAT would be happy with this book. It seems like Barron's is only looking to appeal to people who just buy it off the bookshelf without doing their homework.

***

To summarize, the book needs:

-A complete rewrite with regard to strategies. Like I said, there isn't much. It's also far too easy to see that this book was written decades ago for the older LSAT, which was also back when law school admissions wasn't nearly as competitive. This book might have been fine for the era before the test prep industry existed, but it's way behind the times in terms of detail.

-Significantly less space for sample questions and explanations.

-Significantly more space for drills and strategies.

-More real LSAT questions used throughout the book as examples.

-A few full-length real (and recent) exams at the end.

-No CD. The LSAT is a pencil-and-paper exam. There's no need to include a CD.

LSAT Diary: 20-Something Paralegal, LSAT Prep, and Breakup

This LSAT Diary is from J.P., a paralegal in her early 20s. She broke up with her live-in boyfriend of 2 years right around the time she started prepping for the June LSAT.

If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Leave J.P. some encouragement below in the comments!

Here's her LSAT Diary:

Day 1 (Monday)
A quick background on me and my interest in the legal field:

I knew when I was ten that I wanted to be a lawyer. I've been working as a paralegal since May 2009, when I graduated from the University of Florida with a B.A. in English. I work full time, 8:30 - 5 Monday through Friday and I'm enrolled in a prep class which meets twice a week for 4 hours at a time, although I always show up half an hour early for the review session. I go straight from work to class on these two days and go to the gym immediately after work on alternate days.

In today's class, we discussed Strengthen Logical Reasoning questions. We also did a logic game which literally gave me a migraine that was only curable by the Valium that I took when I got to my car. I absolutely hate logic games. I kick ass on LR and Reading Comp, but games are like completely ridiculous to me. Nonetheless, I press on. Every night since I have started studying for this test I have had to take Valium (prescribed by my doctor in a small dose) in order to sleep through the night. I try to keep up with my workout schedule and just exhaust myself, which helps too.

However, I am grateful for class and work today, as it keeps my mind off of the fact that I just broke up with my live-in boyfriend of two years... and our lease isn't up until August. Financial obligations and not wanting an eviction on my record are creating increased levels of stress for me today and for the first time I can say that I am glad to have the LSAT as an all-consuming panacea for my relationship and finance-related anxiety. I plan to attend an upper-tier law school and didn't want what I now consider to be a parasite along for the ride, hence no more boyfriend.

On my lunch break today, I did some logical reasoning questions. After class, I did some reading comp, for about an hour of outside of class time studying, bringing the total for the day to 5.5 hours.


Day 2 (Tuesday)
No LSAT class today. I came to work early because I was having some pretty severe anxiety this morning about being at my house and the "ex" situation. Studied for about 15 - 30 minutes before my bosses got to work. I worked on mostly menial tasks that I've been putting off since I've been busy with trying to get settlement demands out and working on a few litigation cases. Thus, other less important tasks were on the backburner for a while.

As this firm, you don't have set schedules or deadlines for anything, but if you don't do what you need to be doing everyone will know. You will hear it from your clients, the attorneys, claims adjusters, Doctor's offices and billing offices. Unfortunately in the personal injury field, listening to bitching from frustrated (injured and/or sick) clients about their own insurance company (which they chose and presumably evaluated before they purchased it) and "why everything is taking so long" is not uncommon. It is not unusual for me to hear from clients on a daily basis although I'm managing about 80 cases at present time. Work is a great distraction from the rest of the world! I love my co-workers who keep me strong and push me to do well on the exam.

After work, I went home to have a "house meeting" about the issues going on. After a long discussion, my ex and I will continue to live where we are until our lease is up. Our other condo-mates are also recently broken up and they have both decided to move out of town and continue to pay their share of the rent. Fortunately, my ex and I have gone through a lot already and are getting along better after talking about the reasons why we both know that this never would have ended in anything other than a break-up/divorce. The next four months will be interesting.

After the "house meeting" I went to a friend's house to do drills and homework while she studied some kind of wacky chemistry. She cooked us some delicious dinner while I was there and we took a study break. I was not surprised to get a phone call from the ex asking "if I had had dinner yet" followed by "ok well I'll just eat some ramen then." Ok, indeed. After studying for probably 2-3 hours, I came home, popped my Valium and passed out at 11 or 11:30.

Total Study Time: Estimated 3 hours


Day 3 (Wednesday)
Wednesday was the best day of the week so far. Work wasn't too stressful and I crossed a few more things off of my to-do list, which is always nice. After having the talk with my ex yesterday, I am feeling much more comfortable about the status quo and trying not to think too far ahead, just taking life a day at a time. As coworkers find out that I'm single, the reaction is invariably positive which is nice.

I studied LSAT vocab during my lunch break (defining different terms that you see often on the LSAT) for about 15 minutes. After work I headed straight to class and was super exhausted during the review session so I chugged my water and took a caffeine pill which helped a lot. We did all three section types yesterday (LR, Reading Comp and Games) so my attention was better held than it usually is.

I felt really confident about Reading Comp and Logical Reasoning and didn't get a single question of either category wrong through the various drills. I actually get sort of annoyed sometimes during reading comp when people ask questions about things that seem blatantly obvious to me. All you have to do is look at a particular line in the passage to get the answer.

This is the only thing that I don't like about the class, in that there are many different levels of test-takers. There are almost 100 people in the class, so I guess that's to be expected (and makes me feel better about my chances). I'm really impatient which is good for my job and career but maybe not so good for interpersonal stuff.

Anyways, then there was games.

We did a game from the October 1991 LSAT exam (PrepTest 2). I somehow managed to get three of the six questions right even though I completely blew the set up and missed huge deductions. I have been drilling games and reading the explanations but it's just not clicking for me. I'm not sure what else to do except keep doing homework and keep trying. I again started to get a bad headache during the discussion of this game but fought it. When I got home I watched as much of "The Hangover" as I could before passing out. Crude comedy is a great antidote to LSAT prep!

Total Study Time: 5 hours


Day 4 (Thursday)
Today did not go as planned, at all. Work was more or less laid back but some DVDs that we received from Europe of a Defendant's deposition were badly scratched and that caused a chain reaction of problems throughout the day. Whatever.

Got home from work and did about 30 minutes of LSAT vocab drills, which place me in the top 10% of people who paid $1500 bucks to learn how to take a test... haha. Thought about this fact and laughed at myself some more on my way to the gym to get my ass kicked. A friend of mine teaches a really challenging barbell class on Thursdays, so I went today. I love it because its an hour where I hurt too bad to think about anything (LSAT/relationships/real life) other than my quads/triceps or whatever other muscle group is getting punished.

Got into the car and saw two missed calls from the ex. Called back to find out that he had ordered pizza and bought beer "for us." Thanks, thats exactly what I want after I just kicked myself in the ass to burn maybe 600 calories. Anyways, I got home, relaxed and caved to the peer pressure of pizza and beer, thus ruining my plans to do some more LSAT work when I got home. But we did have fun, and thats what I'll remember when I'm at John Jay's school of water-skiing and law.

Total LSAT study time today: 30 minutes :( FAIL!


Day 5 (Friday)
Fridays at work are usually either really busy or really calm. Since one of my bosses was out this week today was decently slow but I definitely was looking forward to the end of the day. I had a feeling that this weekend would bring more surprises my way so I did a bunch of logical reasoning problems on my lunch break (approx 1 hour) and some vocab drills in the morning before work (about 15 minutes). I had planned to go to happy hour and then study afterwards but that plan changed, as they seem to often do nowadays.

A few friends and coworkers had planned to all meet at a place right near both work and my house, where they have amazing food and drinks and an amazing happy hour special after work. So we were blessed with a 4:30 departure instead of a 5:00 on this glorious Friday. This is when normal life became ridiculous life. I went home to change and the ex and our other roommate were by the pool drinking, so I decided to have a drink with them. After chatting for about half an hour I told them that I was leaving. "Where are you going?" - Ex. "Happy hour with some girls." Feeling obligated, I invited them both as I expected them to continue to drink at the pool and be generally awesome dudes.

I left for happy hour and met up with my friends from work, the gym, real life, etc. and we are all having a great time drinking good beer and eating good food. My ex calls me from the front door of the bar with our roommate in tow. The second that he got to the table everything became awkward and tense. He stared at the TVs the entire time that he was there and when anyone tried to engage him in conversation he gave a few words at best in response. So I was annoyed because he was either 1) checking up on me or 2) trying to make me have a shitty time.

I asked him to step outside with me to figure out what his problem was but of course he didn't want to, since he is a child. Fortunately, they left 30-45 minutes later and I stayed for another few hours with everyone. I returned home to the ex asleep at 9:30 pm in our bed and joined him, ending another wonderful day of cohabitation with a jerk.

Total LSAT study: 1.15 hours


Day 6 (Saturday)
This weekend was a blur. I woke up on Saturday, took a diagnostic from 10-about 1:30. I've gone up 4 points this month so that made me kind of sort of happy but not ecstatic. I then went to go lay out by the pool since its a rare pleasure that I can only take advantage of on the weekends. I brought my LSAT book with me and did some problems until the sun was in full force and then put it away. Total pool studying was maybe an hour and a half.

When the ex came home from work, he joined me by the pool with some Coronas. I love Corona, even though it is a shitty beer, because it reminds me of the Keys and the beach. So we sat by the pool and talked about how we'd like to be able to live together comfortably. I made lots of suggestions about how this could be done and he agreed. He also told me that he's getting a mattress from a friend but didn't say when he would be using it.

We went out to dinner that night with our roommate, which was sort of a turning point in the weekend. Throughout dinner the ex made snarky little comments here and there, and I'm not the sort of person to let this go. This ended with character assassination and me fantasizing about the giant steak knife that I was using to cut my filet.

When we got home I immediately went to my friend's house and indulged in mind-numbing activities until I went home to pass out.

Total study time: 4.5 hours


Day 7 (Sunday)
After my diagnostic yesterday I wanted a break and I didn't wake up feeling great. I cleaned up around the house a little bit (laundry, vacuum, etc.) and then went to lay out by the pool again. My roommate got home before the ex so he came and laid out by the pool. We talked about our breakups and how we were trying to make the situations amicable. The ex got home pretty late so there wasn't much sun left, but he again brought some tasty beers. We were all getting along fine but not talking much.

The LSAT was the last thing on my mind today but I grabbed my book when we went inside and they were flipping around various sports channels while I did problems. I felt growing tension so I went for a walk and called family members who didn't yet know that I am now single. When I came back home, another friend of the ex's had arrived and drinking was in full force. I continued to do problems out of my workbook while intermittently talking to the guys. This continued until about 10pm when the ex and company decided to "go hot tubbing."

I immediately got pissed, because I told him that for us to live together comfortably I need to be able to sleep uninterrupted and not worry about him gallivanting around town (drunk) with other people (girls). He said everything would be fine, not to worry about it. At 12:30 am, I am awoken by his two friends coming home, without the ex. I immediately flip the eff out and demand that they take me to the hot tub. They take me to the hot tub, no ex there.

At this point, I am hysterically flipping out. I don't even want to recount the various crazy things that I did to try to find him but the story ends with me taking two valiums at 1:30 and passing out until 6 am, when I woke up and drove around looking for him. I officially HATE my ex-boyfriend and hope that he drowned in the hot tub. It turns out that he had passed out at an apartment in the complex where they were "hot-tubbing" but the dynamic of our relationship has gone from pretty great to pretty horrible.

At this point I am debating whether it would be a good idea to just stick it out for the next 55 days or to deal with moving all of my things before the LSAT and paying two leases through July. This drama is very much unwanted at this point in my life, obviously, but my plan is to bury myself in my work. We'll see what happens! I hope that the readers of this crazy week of my life are able to see that even with crazy drama and a crazy schedule you can still study your butt off for the LSAT and do well. I'm at a 158 right now and I started much lower. My goal is to be in Top 25 range (168 +) but of course I'm hoping for a 180 ;).

Thanks for reading and good luck to everyone on the exam.

Total study time: about 4-5 hours with distractions/talking in between

Photo by paperbackwriter / CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

1-Month LSAT Study Schedule / Plan

Also see the 1-Month LSAT Study Schedule: Premium Day-By-Day Version.

Treat this as a sample 1-month LSAT prep schedule. However, please don't take this post as an indication that I believe prepping in only a month is a good idea. I recommend a minimum of 3 months.

With less than a month left, it's time to crack down, so put the social life on hold. I hope you've been studying for a while. However, assuming you've done no studying at all, this is a very compressed version of my other LSAT study schedules. Alter it according to your needs.

I've reviewed all books and PrepTests below in my best LSAT prep books recommendations post.

Week 1:

Review my relevant articles on Logic Games and complete this list of Logic Games from PrepTests 52-61 ordered by difficulty.

(Note: You may want to use different exams than the ones from 52-61 if you can. Feel free to use games from at least 6 LSAT PrepTests prior to PrepTest 51 (untimed) after reviewing the relevant articles on my site. You can use my list of Logic Games categorized by type (also see this list) to identify them. Review all games that give you difficulty.

Complete several Pure Sequencing, Basic Linear, and Advanced Linear games from PrepTests 52-61 after completing the relevant articles on my site, doing at least 8 games per day. Complete several Grouping and Combination games from PrepTests 52-61 after reviewing the relevant articles. Review all questions that give you difficulty, whether or not you answer them incorrectly.

Complete a few timed sections of Logic Games from these exams.


Week 2
: Review my articles on Logical Reasoning and complete several questions of each type from PrepTests 52-61 after reading the relevant article.

Determine which question-types give you the most trouble. Review all questions that give you difficulty, whether or not you answer them incorrectly.

Complete a few timed sections of Logic Games and a few timed sections of Logical Reasoning from these exams.


Week 3:

Day 1: Review my articles on Reading Comprehension and complete some Reading Comp passages from PrepTests 52-61 (untimed). Review.

Day 2: Complete some more Reading Comp passages from those exams (untimed). Review. Do a few timed sections of Logic Games, Logical Reasoning, and Reading Comprehension from PrepTests 52-61. Review.

Use these free Logic Games Explanations, these video explanations, and these other LSAT explanations after completing the relevant exam.

For the full-length tests covered this week in Days 3-7, use 6 recent LSAT PrepTests. (Consider using fewer exams and giving yourself a day off here or there.)


Day 3: Do 4-section test with 10-min break in the middle. Take a long break (1-2 hours), then review wrong answers. Determine which question-types give you the most trouble. Puzzle over questions until you FULLY understand why you got them wrong.

Day 4: Do 5-section test with 10-min break after section 3. (You get the 5th section by splicing in a section from another exam. This 5th section represents the unscored "experimental" you'll do on test day. You won't know which section is the experimental one on test day.) Take a break and review as before.

Day 5: Do 4-section test with 10-minute break in the middle. Take long break and review.

Day 6: Repeat Day 4's schedule but with a different PrepTest. Take long break and review.

Day 7: Do 6-section test with 10-minute break in the middle by splicing in 2 sections from other PrepTests. (Why do 6? Because doing more than you'll actually do on game day makes game day seem easy. Read more on 6-section exams.) Take a break and review.


Week 4: Use 6 or 7 recent LSAT PrepTests. (Consider using fewer exams and giving yourself a day off here or there.)

Day 1: 5-section test with break and review.

Day 2: 6-section test with break and review.

Day 3: 5-section test with break and review

Day 4: 6-section test with break and review.

Day 5: 5-section test with break and review.

Day 6: Relax. Watch a movie, go to the gym, or read a novel. Do anything to get your mind off the exam. If you don't know it at this point, one more day won't make a difference if you've studied adequately.

Finally, rock the LSAT on Test Day.

***

Also check out my other sample LSAT study schedules and plans.

Cambridge Group, LSAT Logic, and Budweiser's Drinkability (PDF)

LSAT Blog Cambridge LSAT PDF Group Logic4 years ago, Anheuser-Busch (the good people who make Budweiser and Bud Light) launched a marketing campaign called "Drinkability." This was based on the recommendation of The Cambridge Group, a management consulting firm.

A potential problem: The Cambridge Group is not a marketing firm. Management consulting firms generally focus on compiling reports, performing detailed analysis, and making suggestions for improved efficiency, etc. (wikipedia).

Does this necessarily qualify them to make recommendations about marketing campaigns for Budweiser or Bud Light?

Recently, Advertising Age suggested otherwise:
[Anheuser-Busch] scrapped 'Drinkability' for the Super Bowl. The firm, The Cambridge Group, ended up going far beyond portfolio management. In fact, its exhaustive research resulted in the "Drinkability" campaign that -- four years and millions in fees later -- is considered a major factor in Bud Light posting the first full-year sales decline in its history.
So, we have a correlation. When The Cambridge Group wasn't involved in designing any Bud Light marketing campaigns, there was no full-year sales decline. The Cambridge Group gets involved, and voila! We have the 1st full-year sales decline in Bud Light's history.

Does this mean that The Cambridge Group's involvement caused the decline?

Not necessarily.


Maybe something totally unrelated caused Bud Light's sales decline.

It's possible that:

-people finally realized Bud Light tastes like piss
-a new beer came out that's geared to Bud Light drinkers
-there's been a general decline in beer consumption

In fact, maybe the sales decline would've been even worse if The Cambridge Group hadn't stepped in.

However, a little additional evidence suggests that it might actually be a full-fledged causal relationship, instead of just a correlational one.

In other words, The Cambridge Group is probably somewhat responsible.

The AdAge article continues:
Cambridge's exhaustive findings led directly to dramatic shifts in how Budweiser and Bud Light were marketed. Each brand largely abandoned the emotional appeals that had helped them become the two largest beer brands in the U.S. for straightforward pitches about process and product attributes that coincided with worsening sales for both labels.

Frankly, Bud Light's Drinkability commercials suck.

Here are a few:

Bud Light Drinkability Pool Party


Bud Light Drinkability Cabin Party

Bud Light Drinkability SuperBowl 2009

Bud Light - The Budget Cuts

The evidence suggests that Cambridge should stick to what it does best and leave the advertising to all the qualified Don Drapers out there.

Another common LSAT flaw is assuming just because someone is an expert in one area, they're also an expert in a different area.

For example, just because Steven Levitt is a top-notch economist, this doesn't mean he knows anything about how to perform this dance.

Similarly, Cambridge focuses on management/strategy consulting. It fills its marketing materials with all sorts of jargon (PDF), but none of it seems to involve their skill in advertising or marketing.

If a company's marketing materials cover all its areas of expertise (and if this one PDF is representative of Cambridge's marketing materials), then it's safe to say that Cambridge is not an expert in marketing or advertising.

It should keep its hands off our beer commercials so we can enjoy Budweiser ads that make "emotional appeals," like this one:



Betcha didn't think I could relate Budweiser's Wazzzup commercial to the LSAT.

Photo by dietsch / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

LSAT Diary: Studying with Kids and Farmville

LSAT Blog Studying With Kids Farmville
If you want to be in LSAT Diaries, please email me at LSATUnplugged@gmail.com. (You can be in LSAT Diaries whether you've taken the exam already or not.)

Leave Lucy some encouragement below in the comments!

Lucy's LSAT Diary:

As I head into the backstretch of my preparation for the LSAT, I have begun to truly realize what preparation means. As I sat in my alma mater's library working diligently on a section of assumption questions, I hit a wall. I could not focus and the answers were all blurring together. It is then I pushed back my chair and decided to take a break. Now I always check my watch and have become accustomed to documenting all my hours in a day or week of what I have studied (as well as writing it down to make myself accountable). I was stunned to see I had been studying for nearly three hours!

Where have I gotten the stamina? This is more than “digging deep”; this is hard work, practice and endurance.

I walked outside and took a deep breath. Wow. This must be what it is like to train for the Boston Marathon. I felt an immediate respect for athletes, because if you really think about it, that is what we are…athletes (in the mental sense) preparing for the exam of our life. There is literally hours on end I do not speak to anyone...nothing, except a hello in the elevator.

Now, I don’t know about you, but I have wanted to go to law school for a very, very long time. The timing of life never seemed right and something else always managed to pull me away for something better. Vacations, work, business travel, parties, significant other, friends, well…you get the picture. This is the first time I have actually said “nope, sorry…not available this weekend”. This my fellow LSAT taker is earth shattering. If you knew me, you would really understand as I can be a real handful…my motto has always been work hard and play harder. I have even taken over the formal dining table utilizing every square inch of the 7-foot beast for my obsession because that is what I feel right now, a bit obsessed.

I first began to seriously study for the LSAT in July 2009 and two weeks into it I began smoking (bleck). I foolishly thought that I could have the exam ‘nailed’ within two months for the September LSAT, how completely wrong I was! Now maybe some of you have the natural genius or ability to do well on standardized exams…I am not one of them. I have my MBA and I have taken the GMAT, which was grueling enough…however, the LSAT takes that to a whole new level. I realized within three weeks into my studies that I was not going to be ready for the September LSAT.

When I realized this, I panicked. I would not hit early admissions and I would be lumped in with everyone else like cattle. I then made the decision to not push for December and to study for the LSAT the right way…not under pressure or with my own set of demands/expectations screwing it up for myself. I decided to put off law school for one more year and I am now very glad that I took a step back, I have also somehow in the process learned a balance (and respect for myself) during this development.

During this progression, I have learned that I will not ‘die’ if I do not read Facebook for a day, miss out on friends’ witty wall posts or not farm my Farmville crops. The laundry will not fossilize to the wall like a phytolith (heehee, big LSAT word), I will not dry up if I don’t go to the wine-tasting on Saturday or don’t meet up for brunch on Sunday with Nicole. I have also learned to say no to my very demanding boss and set boundaries.

Nothing will allow me to look back and say “gosh, maybe I ‘woulda/coulda’ gotten a 176 if I had not been working those extra 20 hours (instead of studying) or lying on the couch all day on a Sunday instead…” (You get the picture). Time matters and time is very precious to a hardcore LSAT taker. I actually took this entire week off from work to do just that…study. That is it. Not go on vacation, not visit family, not party...just study as much as I can and want to. Nothing more, nothing less.

That does not mean that I do not have challenges that pull me away. In fact, just yesterday, I received a phone call from my 7 year-old son’s teacher it was discovered he had lice (appalling but true) - now I should also add that my fancy front-loading (very expensive) washing machine has not worked for TWO months as it keeps breaking down and they keep putting new parts in it instead of giving me a new one(under warranty I will add) – so I make an emergency run to Walgreens for a lice kit and Hefty bags so when I pick him up, whoever he got the cooties from does not transfer to the rest of the family..I even make him strip in the school parking lot, throwing backpack, jacket and anything loose into Sir Hefty.

Then off we go home...I get him in the shower to scrub and race around like a possessed woman stripping clothing and bedding. I then run to the Laundromat and wash everything at once in hot water, make a frantic call to my husband “Come home NOW!...you will be taking a day off tomorrow (he has 5 weeks of PTO)” and then get back to the house, all the while I am watching the clock paying attention to every minute I am not studying.

Once everything seems settled, I grab some old spaghetti out of the refrigerator, zap it and plop it in front of the boys. I then head off to campus as I have also learned very early on that I rarely if ever get any serious studying done in my home environment, just too many distractions (duh). I am home by 11:30 pm. The 3-year old is vomiting. Old spaghetti is not a good thing and I immediately wonder how I am going to make it to June 7th.

I have come to the firm conclusion I will either lose my sanity and my children will end up eating Burger King (not an entirely BAD thing) everyday, or I will wake up the next day tired, but with a giggle in my heart that somehow I managed to still get six hours of studying done after fighting off cooties, assholes and exhaustion. The moral of my story is DO what has to be done; quickly and efficiently so that you can get back to studying… before you forget why you need to fit clowns in a car or birds in a forest.

As I look down, I realize I have picked off all of my manicured French nails *sigh*. Time to smoke that menthol before heading to bed – June 8th…life resumes as I remember it.

For all you “non-touchy-feely-types” stop reading now.

Be Positive

Positive people are successful!

Make yourself a “visual board” – I have one and I look at it 10+x a day!

GIVE yourself an LSAT score you want…set yourself up to achieve it!

You will attain your goal

Do not give up

Do not get depressed, do not get frustrated!

Believe in yourself

You can and will do this!

~stay focused

~stay focused

~stay focused


Photo by 13kingdoms / CC BY-NC-SA 2.0