Reading Comprehension: Would Agree About

This is another post in our series describing the classification system Zen of 180 uses for the reading comprehension section. If you're not sure how to approach studying for the LSAT, our 19 reading comprehension standards break it down into manageable chunks; also, our free online LSAT analyzer will let you know which types of passage structures give you the most trouble.

Today's task, would agree about, is another extrapolation strand that requires the examinee to combine information presented in the passage and derive a new statement from it. Unlike reading comprehension tasks in the opinion strand that pick up on non-evidentiary keywords, would agree about is more of a blend of the most strongly supported by [stimulus] and justify logical reasoning task. It thus benefits from cleanly prestating the topic's actors, relationships, and degrees of certainty for each, but injects a tiny bit of affective judgement from the point of view of the author. Thus, you are extrapolating from the author's stated evidence and inferred point of view, not from his or her opinion.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Rachel Maddow breaks down the evidence that Mitt Romney and Ron Paul would agree about what should happen to a person without health insurance who develops a fatal health condition.

Because of the need to prephrase the actors, relationships, and degrees of certainty, marking the passage's structural signposts that clearly assign examples and counterexamples to their actors will help to quickly eliminate distractors. You can read through our discussion of main idea or title and primary purpose to review these highlighting techniques. Additionally, it's important to review those tasks because the answers to maid idea and primary purpose questions will help frame the author's POV for would agree about questions.

The question stems for would agree about questions are easy to spot, as the sample question we'll be using from LSAC's website exemplifies. Here are some examples of the question stems from modern LSATs:

The passage suggests that the author would be likely to
agree with each of the following statements:

The passage most strongly suggests that the author holds which one of the following views? 

Based on what can be inferred from the passages, which
one of the following acts would have been [treated negatively] under [system], but would not be [treated negatively] under [another system]?

Note that the second example above explicitly instructs the examinee to consider the author's viewpoint; whether this task would be a would agree about or an opinion strand task would depend on whether the correct answer choice hinged on the author's evidence or opinion. Today, we'll be using the same passage we introduced in the passage or author says explanation, a comparative passage where two authors in the 1990s discuss anthropomorphic climate change.

       Passage A
            In January 1995 a vast section of ice broke off the
       Larsen ice shelf in Antarctica. While this occurrence,
       the direct result of a regional warming trend that began
       in the 1940s, may be the most spectacular
(5)   manifestation yet of serious climate changes
       occurring on the planet as a consequence of
       atmospheric heating, other symptoms—more intense
       storms, prolonged droughts, extended heat waves, and
       record flooding—have been emerging around the
(10) world for several years.

            According to scientific estimates, furthermore,
       sea-level rise resulting from global warming will
       reach 3 feet (1 meter) within the next century. Such a
       rise could submerge vast coastal areas, with
(15) potentially irreversible consequences. 

            Late in 1995 the Intergovernmental Panel on
       Climate Change (IPCC) reported that it had detected
       the “fingerprint“ of human activity as a contributor to
       the warming of the earth’s atmosphere. Furthermore,
(20) panel scientists attributed such warming directly to
       the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide released
       by our burning of fossil fuels. The IPCC report thus
       clearly identifies a pattern of climatic response to
       human activities in the climatological record, thereby
(25) establishing without doubt that global warming can
       no longer be attributed solely to natural climate        
       variability.

This passage introduces the topic of global warming and the IPCC's findings that humans are contributing to the phenomenon. From these findings, the author jumps to their clearly stated opinion on the topic (pink highlights), which conclude the final paragraph.

       Passage B
            Over the past two decades, an extreme view of
       global warming has developed. While it contains
(30) some facts, this view also contains exaggerations and
       misstatements, and has sometimes resulted in
       unreasonable environmental policies.
            According to this view, global warming will cause the
       polar ice to melt, raising global sea levels,
(35) flooding entire regions, destroying crops, and
       displacing millions of people. However, there is still a
       great deal of uncertainty regarding a potential rise in
       sea levels. Certainly, if the earth warms, sea levels
       will rise as the water heats up and expands. If the
(40) polar ice caps melt, more water will be added to the
       oceans, raising sea levels even further. There is some
       evidence that melting has occurred; however, there is
       also evidence that the Antarctic ice sheets are
       growing. In fact, it is possible that a warmer sea-
(45) surface temperature will cause more water to
       evaporate, and when wind carries the moisture-laden
       air over the land, it will precipitate out as snow,
       causing the ice sheets to grow. Certainly, we need to
       have better knowledge about the hydrological cycle
(50) before predicting dire consequences as a result of
       recent increases in global temperatures.
            This view also exaggerates the impact that human
       activity has on the planet. While human activity may
       be a factor in global warming, natural events appear
(55) to be far more important. The 1991 eruption of Mount
       Pinatubo in the Philippines, for example, caused a
       decrease in the average global temperature, while El
       Niño, a periodic perturbation in the ocean’s
       temperature and circulation, causes extreme global
(60) climatic events, including droughts and major
       flooding. Of even greater importance to the earth’s
       climate are variations in the sun’s radiation and in the
       earth’s orbit. Climate variability has always existed and
       will continue to do so, regardless of human
(65) intervention.

As with many tasks in reading comprehension, the Zen system suggests that you reframe back to the main idea and/or primary purpose answers to ensure that you are starting from the correct vantage point on a new question. This is especially important in both the extrapolation and opinion strands, and will often make today's task of would agree about much easier. The actual process of this strategy is to read the passage and then answer the questions in order; often, the main idea or primary purpose questions will be in the first 1 or 2 for a given passage. Then, when you continue on to a question in the extrapolation or opinion strands, you re-read the answer choice to the main idea or primary purpose question to ensure that your head is cleared from any intervening questions.
For this passage, we won't fully discuss the main idea or primary purpose, but below is the flowchart for applying this strategy with the correct primary purpose answer for this passage.
After reading the passage the primary purpose task:

Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship between the argument made in passage A and the
argument made in passage B?

and correctly answering it with:

(C) Passage A warns about the effects of certain recent
      phenomena, while passage B argues that some
      inferences based on those phenomena are unfounded.

With this prephrase in mind, the would agree about task should be much easier to answer, even if it is inverted to be about what the authors would disagree about. Passage A's author predicts dire consequences from global warming, and Passage B's author disputes the strength of the evidence linking global warming to human actions.

The authors of the two passages would be most likely to
disagree over

(A) whether or not any melting of the polar ice caps
      has occurred
(B) whether natural events can cause changes in
      global climate conditions
(C) whether warmer air temperatures will be likely to
      raise oceanic water temperatures
(D) the extent to which natural climate variability is
      responsible for global warming
(E) the extent to which global temperatures have risen
      in recent decades

Answer choice D is a extrapolated causality statement from Passage A's and Passage B's evidentiary statements about the role (or lack thereof) that humans have played in global warming. The only non-human causes mentioned by either passage are the naturalistic examples in Passage B (volcanoes, El Nino, and variations in sun radiation), and answer choice D picks up on the clash between those examples and the evidence from IPCC that Passage A invokes in lines 20-27. Based on their cited evidence and implied POV, these two authors would disagree about the relative weight that human activities and natural climate variability have played in global warming.

Answer choice A ignores lines 41-42, where Passage B's author clearly admits that "some" polar ice cap melting has occurred. Although Passage A's author would clearly argue that melting has occurred, the absolute language --"any"--in answer choice A makes it too extreme for Passage B's author to disagree about.

Answer choice B makes a similar mistake, except with Passage A's stated evidence. Although the IPCC evidence in lines 20-27 emphasize that human activity is significant enough to increase global warming, it does not deny natural climate variability's role in global warming.

Answer choice C repeats B's mistake, taking Passage A's lack of evidence about air temperature to mean that its author doesn't see a causal connection to water temperature. As with the logical reasoning extrapolation strands, be sure to keep a sharp look out for answer choices that are simply too strong or introduce a new actor/relationship that the passage does not present enough information about. In this case, Passage B mentions air temperature in lines 38-39, but we don't have enough information from Passage A to determine if its author would disagree.

Finally, answer choice E is doubly incorrect because neither author mentions any evidence about the amount of warming; they merely present evidence about its causes and their relative contributions.

Reading Comprehension: Most Supported by Passage

This is another post in our series describing the classification system Zen of 180 uses for the reading comprehension section. If you're not sure how to approach studying for the LSAT, our 19 reading comprehension standards break it down into manageable chunks; also, our free online LSAT analyzer will let you know which types of passage structures give you the most trouble.

Today's task, most supported by passage, requires an examinee to combine explicit information in the passage, often highlighted in the question stem, and choose a factual statement or conclusion that can be drawn from them. It is analogous to the most strongly supported by [stimulus] logical reasoning task, and similarly benefits from cleanly prestating the topic's actors, relationships, and degrees of certainty for each.

This NASA video is full of many layers of nested extrapolations. Based on what we know, how would our solar system look from another system, from millions of years ago, and can scientists find planets using this technique?

Because of the need to prephrase the actors, relationships, and degrees of certainty, marking the passage's structural signposts that clearly assign examples and counterexamples to their actors will help to quickly eliminate distractors. You can read through our discussion of main idea or title and primary purpose to review these highlighting techniques.

The question stems for most supported by passage questions are often difficult to spot, as they are easily conflated with passage or author implies. At its base, the difference between the two tasks is between extrapolating facts and identifying opinion; today we're working on making a clean logical inference from explicit scientific evidence, which is why the sample question we'll be using from LSAC's website is classified as a most supported by passage and is not an opinion standard.

Some examples of most supported by passage question stems from modern LSATs:

Based on the passage, which one of the following is most likely to be true of any [category] used to replace [subcategory] in the process mentioned in the first paragraph?

Which one of the following is most strongly implied by
the passage? 

It can be inferred from the passage that if the [actor] mentioned in lines 46–47 were eliminated . . . which one of the following would be the most likely to occur?

The passage most strongly suggests which one of the following about the use of [subject]?

We'll be using the same passage we introduced in the passage or author says explanation, a comparative passage where two authors in the 1990s discuss anthropomorphic climate change.

       Passage A
            In January 1995 a vast section of ice broke off the
       Larsen ice shelf in Antarctica. While this occurrence,
       the direct result of a regional warming trend that began
       in the 1940s, may be the most spectacular
(5)   manifestation yet of serious climate changes
       occurring on the planet as a consequence of
       atmospheric heating, other symptoms—more intense
       storms, prolonged droughts, extended heat waves, and
       record flooding—have been emerging around the
(10) world for several years.

            According to scientific estimates, furthermore,
       sea-level rise resulting from global warming will
       reach 3 feet (1 meter) within the next century. Such a
       rise could submerge vast coastal areas, with
(15) potentially irreversible consequences. 

            Late in 1995 the Intergovernmental Panel on
       Climate Change (IPCC) reported that it had detected
       the “fingerprint“ of human activity as a contributor to
       the warming of the earth’s atmosphere. Furthermore,
(20) panel scientists attributed such warming directly to
       the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide released
       by our burning of fossil fuels. The IPCC report thus
       clearly identifies a pattern of climatic response to
       human activities in the climatological record, thereby
(25) establishing without doubt that global warming can
       no longer be attributed solely to natural climate        
       variability.

This passage introduces the topic of global warming and the IPCC's findings that humans are contributing to the phenomenon. From these findings, the author jumps to their clearly stated opinion on the topic (pink highlights), which conclude the final paragraph.

       Passage B
            Over the past two decades, an extreme view of
       global warming has developed. While it contains
(30) some facts, this view also contains exaggerations and
       misstatements, and has sometimes resulted in
       unreasonable environmental policies.
            According to this view, global warming will cause the
       polar ice to melt, raising global sea levels,
(35) flooding entire regions, destroying crops, and
       displacing millions of people. However, there is still a
       great deal of uncertainty regarding a potential rise in
       sea levels. Certainly, if the earth warms, sea levels
       will rise as the water heats up and expands. If the
(40) polar ice caps melt, more water will be added to the
       oceans, raising sea levels even further. There is some
       evidence that melting has occurred; however, there is
       also evidence that the Antarctic ice sheets are
       growing. In fact, it is possible that a warmer sea-
(45) surface temperature will cause more water to
       evaporate, and when wind carries the moisture-laden
       air over the land, it will precipitate out as snow,
       causing the ice sheets to grow. Certainly, we need to
       have better knowledge about the hydrological cycle
(50) before predicting dire consequences as a result of
       recent increases in global temperatures.
            This view also exaggerates the impact that human
       activity has on the planet. While human activity may
       be a factor in global warming, natural events appear
(55) to be far more important. The 1991 eruption of Mount
       Pinatubo in the Philippines, for example, caused a
       decrease in the average global temperature, while El
       Niño, a periodic perturbation in the ocean’s
       temperature and circulation, causes extreme global
(60) climatic events, including droughts and major
       flooding. Of even greater importance to the earth’s
       climate are variations in the sun’s radiation and in the
       earth’s orbit. Climate variability has always existed and
       will continue to do so, regardless of human
(65) intervention.

This second passage clearly tries to downplay the evidence introduced in Passage A, as well as present several countervailing factors and natural examples that outweigh humanity's impact on global warming. The signposts for each point of view (pink), the examples and counterexamples each author uses (blues and cyans, respectively), as well as the more structural elements (green and red), will help us find and reference back for any passage or author says questions. 

The author of passage B would be most likely to make which
one of the following criticisms about the predictions cited in
passage A concerning a rise in sea level?

This question stem is one of the most complicated for this task, as it exemplifies the difficulty of classifying the task as either identifying Passage B author's opinion on Passage A or extrapolating from the evidence that the author includes in Passage B's argument. Ultimately, though, you'll still want to pay attention to the actors, relationships, and degrees of certainty for either task. If an answer choice correctly maps on to the relevant portion(s) of the passage, then it will be correct.

In this case, the author of Passage B clearly thinks that the anthropomorphic global warming opinion in Passage A is "exaggerated" and based on evidence that we don't fully understand and that is, in the author's opinion, outweighed by other, naturalistic, causes. Ideally, you would have already answered a main idea or primary purpose question prior to reaching today's question, as reframing to that prephrase would make comparing the answer choices much easier.

(A) These predictions incorrectly posit a causal
      relationship between the warming of the earth
      and rising sea levels.
(B) These predictions are supported only by inconclusive
      evidence that some melting of the polar ice caps
      has occurred.
(C) These predictions exaggerate the degree to which
      global temperatures have increased in recent
      decades.
(D) These predictions rely on an inadequate
      understanding of the hydrological cycle.
(E) These predictions assume a continuing increase in
      global temperatures that may not occur.

Answer choice D is a factual statement that is supported by lines 48-52, and not an opinion, because it merely points out that scientists do not currently fully understand how the hydrological cycle will react to the admittedly observed global warming phenomenon. "Rely" does not convey the evaluative element necessary to convey the author's opinion, as it points out a gap in scientists' current abilities to properly extrapolate from the underlying evidence. This answer choice fits nicely in with our prephrase of Passage B's actors, relationships, and degrees of certainty: we shouldn't make predictions of global ruin until we better understand the mechanisms underlying the phenomenon.

Answer choice A ignores lines 38-39, where the author admits that warming has some relationship to sea levels; stating that the relationship is more complicated than it is treated in Passage A is not denying causality.

Answer choice B inappropriately limits the author to criticizing Passage A on the evidence of melting ice caps. Line 30 uses plural "facts," and the rest of the argument focuses on rising sea levels, of which polar ice caps are only a piece.

Answer choice C imputes information for Passage B's author that neither passage discusses: we only know that temperatures have risen, not by how much.

Answer choice E similarly would require evidence that neither passage presents. Although both passages discuss future effects of global warming, neither rely on a continuing increase.

Reading Comprehension: Passage or Author Says

This is another post in our series describing the classification system Zen of 180 uses for the reading comprehension section. If you're not sure how to approach studying for the LSAT, our 19 reading comprehension standards break it down into manageable chunks; also, our free online LSAT analyzer will let you know which types of passage structures give you the most trouble.

Today's task, passage or author says, sounds straightforward: which of the answer choices did the author explicitly state in the passage? Although these questions are often inverted to choose the answer that the author didn't state, they can still be difficult even in their positive form.

There's some strong language in this video, but that's often what makes memorable movie quotes. Unfortunately, it's much harder to parse out explicit evidence on an LSAT RC passage.

The biggest problem with author or passage says is that they invite the examinee to spend a few minutes double- and triple-checking the passage to ensure that their answer is, in fact, not mentioned in the text. While some distractors will be easy to eliminate because they were clearly not mentioned in the text, most will be minor mischaracterizations or inferences that can be drawn from the text (as opposed to explicitly stated).

Thus, the manner of creating structural signposts as you read through the passage will help to quickly find where a given answer choice is located, or, if you're eliminating distractors, where the author mentioned the topic of the answer choice. You can read through our discussion of main idea or title and primary purpose to review these highlighting techniques.

The question stems for passage or author says questions are normally easy to spot, often containing the keywords "mentions/offers/states" or "according to the passage/author" to show that the task is to restate the passage's explicit evidence. However, be careful to distinguish between this task and expert says and the various explicit and evaluating evidence standards that also use "mention" with a meaning or purpose task added on. 

Some examples of passage or author says question stems from modern LSATs:

According to passage B, which one of the following is an example of a [phenomenon] for which [scientists] propose a questionable explanation?

According to the passage, which one of the following was a motivating factor in certain Latina authors’ decisions regarding the structure of their autobiographical writings? 

The passage offers which one of the following as an
explanation for why [phenomenon]?

You can find this passage and the others we'll be using to describe the RC section on LSAC's website. We'll be diving into a new passage today, a comparative passage where two authors in the 1990s discuss anthropomorphic climate change.

       Passage A
            In January 1995 a vast section of ice broke off the
       Larsen ice shelf in Antarctica. While this occurrence,
       the direct result of a regional warming trend that began
       in the 1940s, may be the most spectacular
(5)   manifestation yet of serious climate changes
       occurring on the planet as a consequence of
       atmospheric heating, other symptoms—more intense
       storms, prolonged droughts, extended heat waves, and
       record flooding—have been emerging around the
(10) world for several years.

            According to scientific estimates, furthermore,
       sea-level rise resulting from global warming will
       reach 3 feet (1 meter) within the next century. Such a
       rise could submerge vast coastal areas, with
(15) potentially irreversible consequences. 

            Late in 1995 the Intergovernmental Panel on
       Climate Change (IPCC) reported that it had detected
       the “fingerprint“ of human activity as a contributor to
       the warming of the earth’s atmosphere. Furthermore,
(20) panel scientists attributed such warming directly to
       the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide released
       by our burning of fossil fuels. The IPCC report thus
       clearly identifies a pattern of climatic response to
       human activities in the climatological record, thereby
(25) establishing without doubt that global warming can
       no longer be attributed solely to natural climate        
       variability.

This passage introduces the topic of global warming and the IPCC's findings that humans are contributing to the phenomenon. From these findings, the author jumps to their clearly stated opinion on the topic (pink highlights), which conclude the final paragraph.

       Passage B
            Over the past two decades, an extreme view of
       global warming has developed. While it contains
(30) some facts, this view also contains exaggerations and
       misstatements, and has sometimes resulted in
       unreasonable environmental policies.
            According to this view, global warming will cause the
       polar ice to melt, raising global sea levels,
(35) flooding entire regions, destroying crops, and
       displacing millions of people. However, there is still a
       great deal of uncertainty regarding a potential rise in
       sea levels. Certainly, if the earth warms, sea levels
       will rise as the water heats up and expands. If the
(40) polar ice caps melt, more water will be added to the
       oceans, raising sea levels even further. There is some
       evidence that melting has occurred; however, there is
       also evidence that the Antarctic ice sheets are
       growing. In fact, it is possible that a warmer sea-
(45) surface temperature will cause more water to
       evaporate, and when wind carries the moisture-laden
       air over the land, it will precipitate out as snow,
       causing the ice sheets to grow. Certainly, we need to
       have better knowledge about the hydrological cycle
(50) before predicting dire consequences as a result of
       recent increases in global temperatures.
            This view also exaggerates the impact that human
       activity has on the planet. While human activity may
       be a factor in global warming, natural events appear
(55) to be far more important. The 1991 eruption of Mount
       Pinatubo in the Philippines, for example, caused a
       decrease in the average global temperature, while El
       Niño, a periodic perturbation in the ocean’s
       temperature and circulation, causes extreme global
(60) climatic events, including droughts and major
       flooding. Of even greater importance to the earth’s
       climate are variations in the sun’s radiation and in the
       earth’s orbit. Climate variability has always existed and
       will continue to do so, regardless of human
(65) intervention.

This second passage clearly tries to downplay the evidence introduced in Passage A, as well as present several countervailing factors and natural examples that outweigh humanity's impact on global warming. The signposts for each point of view (pink), the examples and counterexamples each author uses (blues and cyans, respectively), as well as the more structural elements (green and red), will help us find and reference back for any passage or author says questions. 

Which one of the following is mentioned in passage B but not
in passage A as a possible consequence of global warming?

This question stem is one of the most complicated for this task, as it requires comparing the two passages to each other and filtering out commonalities. However, the correct answer should jump out because of its interplay on the two passage's central dispute: whether humans are significantly contributing to global warming and whether we understand the phenomenon enough to design environmental policy against anthropomorphic carbon emissions.

(A) an increase in the size of the Antarctic ice sheet
(B) a decrease in the amount of snowfall
(C) a falling of ocean sea levels
(D) an increase in the severity of heat waves
(E) an increase in the frequency of major flooding

Answer choice A is clearly correct, as Passage B mentions the ice sheets growing as a possible, unexpected outcome based on warming sea water and its concomitant increase in snowfall. With the right signposts (mental or physically drawn), the good examinee will reference Passage B, starting with the "however" in line 42, and Passage A, starting with line 1. Passage B mentions growing ice sheets, while A mentions their crumbling; a savvy examinee will mark A and move on without checking the rest of the answer choices. 

Answer choice B is not mentioned by Passage B at all; it only references snowfall at all in line 47, implying that it could increase rather than decrease.

Answer choice C similarly inverts the evidence, as both passages mention rising sea levels (lines 12, and 34).

Answer choice D at least correctly states the change in frequency of heat waves, but only Passage A specifically mentions them (line 8).

Answer choice E is by far the most attractive of the distractors, as both passages explicitly mention flooding (lines 9, 35, 61). However, Passage B never acknowledges that frequency of flooding will increase as a result of global warming, as it only discusses flooding from the point of view of the "extremist" position of anthropomorphic global warming or as a consequence of naturalistic causes. The structural signposts in line 33 ("According to this view,") and line 55 (example of Mount Pinatubo leading to floods) will help the great examinee eliminate answer choice E.

Reading Comprehension: Application of or Analogous to

This is another post describing the classification system Zen of 180 uses for the reading comprehension section; if you're not sure how to approach studying for the LSAT, our 19 reading comprehension standards break it down into manageable chunks; also, our free online LSAT analyzer will let you know which types of passage structures give you the most trouble.

We'll be continuing with the Netherland's tulip bulb craze passage today, which we first outlined for the meaning of or referring to standard.

Many application of or analogous to questions are somewhat easy to identify, as they contain a synonym of application or analogous, and will reference or quote the part(s) of the passage that will serve as the comparison to the answer choices. However, some of this strand's question stems will will not have a keyword, but will clearly prompt the examinee to compare or apply the logic in the answer choices to the logic in the referenced portion of the passage. Thus, this task is part of the extrapolation strand, as it requires you to take information from the author's text and expand upon it or apply it in a new situation. 

The example question we pulled from the sample questions LSAC provides on its website is pretty standard in its form, but some other sample question stems from modern LSATs are:

The relationship between the ways in which [countries'] common law and [ancient civilization's] law treat [subject], as described in the passages, is most analogous to the relationship between which one of the following pairs?

Which one of the following is most analogous to the process, described in the last paragraph, by which the [phenomenon] can be curtailed?

Based on the passage, which one of the following scenarios is most similar to some [field’s] scholars’ use of the [theoretical] principle regarding the [policty] debate?

The explanation of the utility maximization principle in the passage suggests that which one of the following would be most appropriately described as a rational response to [phenomenon]?

The Colbert Report applies an MIT study: longer essays get better scores on the SAT despite errors or evidence, so ideally your writing section should read like Glenn Beck's teleprompter.
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

This extrapolation task most often requires the examinee to consider the question stem's highlighted text within the broader context of the passage's argument. As with the extrapolation strand in logical reasoning, you want to be paying special attention to the referenced topic's actors, relationships, and degrees of certainty. While reading through the passage, you should be actively marking these structural components anyway, as we describe in detail for the main idea and primary purpose tasks. When presented with an application of or analogous to question, you should return to the referenced text's signposts in the passage and cleanly restate who the actors are, how they are related, and how certain we are about each.

The question stem for today's sample provides some helpful focusing issues for the reader.

7. Given Garber’s account of the seventeenth-century Dutch
    tulip market, which one of the following is most analogous to
    someone who bought a tulip bulb of a certain variety in that
    market at a very high price, only to sell a bulb of that variety at
    a much lower price?

It's worth noting that the question is only focused from Garber's point of view; the passage presents both Garbar's opinion and that of Mackay, and a savvy examinee will be sure to make clear structural marks to indicate when the author is presenting which POV. Before we can even get to the full sample question today, though, we of course need to go over the passage.

       In economics, the term “speculative bubble“
       refers to a large upward move in an asset’s price
       driven not by the asset’s fundamentals—that is, by
       the earnings derivable from the asset—but rather by
(5)   mere speculation that someone else will be willing to
       pay a higher price for it. The price increase is then
       followed by a dramatic decline in price, due to a loss
       in confidence that the price will continue to rise, and
       the “bubble“ is said to have burst. According to
(10) Charles Mackay’s classic nineteenth-century account,
       the seventeenth-century Dutch tulip market provides
       an example of a speculative bubble. But the
       economist Peter Garber challenges Mackay’s view,
       arguing that there is no evidence that the Dutch tulip
(15) market really involved a speculative bubble.

       By the seventeenth century, the Netherlands had
       become a center of cultivation and development of
       new tulip varieties, and a market had developed in
       which rare varieties of bulbs sold at high prices. For
(20) example, a Semper Augustus bulb sold in 1625 for an
       amount of gold worth about U.S. $11,000 in 1999.
       Common bulb varieties, on the other hand, sold for
       very low prices. According to Mackay, by 1636 rapid
       price rises attracted speculators, and prices of many
(25) varieties surged upward from November 1636 through
       January 1637. Mackay further states that in February
       1637 prices suddenly collapsed; bulbs could not be
       sold at 10 percent of their peak values. By 1739, the
       prices of all the most prized kinds of bulbs had fallen
(30) to no more than one two-hundredth of 1 percent of
       Semper Augustus’s peak price.

       Garber acknowledges that bulb prices increased
       dramatically from 1636 to 1637 and eventually
       reached very low levels. But he argues that this
(35) episode should not be described as a speculative
       bubble, for the increase and eventual decline in bulb
       prices can be explained in terms of the fundamentals.
       Garber argues that a standard pricing pattern occurs
       for new varieties of flowers. When a particularly
(40) prized variety is developed, its original bulb sells for
       a high price. Thus, the dramatic rise in the price of
       some original tulip bulbs could have resulted as tulips
       in general, and certain varieties in particular, became
       fashionable. However, as the prized bulbs become
(45) more readily available through reproduction from the
       original bulb, their price falls rapidly; after less than
       30 years, bulbs sell at reproduction cost. But this
       does not mean that the high prices of original bulbs
       are irrational, for earnings derivable from the millions
(50) of bulbs descendant from the original bulbs can be
       very high, even if each individual descendant bulb
       commands a very low price. Given that an original
       bulb can generate a reasonable return on investment
       even if the price of descendant bulbs decreases
(55) dramatically, a rapid rise and eventual fall of tulip bulb
       prices need not indicate a speculative bubble.

The passage clearly sets up a debate between Mackay and Garber on whether Tulip Mania was a speculative bubble. However, for our purposes today, we're only interested in how Garber describes the original purchaser of an expensive bulb and sold that same variety for a low cost later. Once again, after reading the question stem, you should try and prephrase the actors, their relationships, and our degree of certainty about each before approaching the questions.

7. Given Garber’s account of the seventeenth-century Dutch
    tulip market, which one of the following is most analogous to
    someone who bought a tulip bulb of a certain variety in that
    market at a very high price, only to sell a bulb of that variety at
    a much lower price?

A good examinee would return (either mentally or physically) to the passage's third paragraph, where Garber's argument is fully described. The question stem tells you to focus on the buyer of the expensive tulip bulb who eventually sells versions of that bulb at a much lower price--the best examinees will realize that the question is referring to "original" and "descendant" bulbs from the text and make note of this relationship between the buyer, the original bulb, the descendant bulbs, and the ability to make a profit even with low prices because of the large number of descendant bulbs.

                                                                                                                But this
       does not mean that the high prices of original bulbs
       are irrational, for earnings derivable from the millions
(50) of bulbs descendant from the original bulbs can be
       very high, even if each individual descendant bulb
       commands a very low price.

With this prephrase in mind, we can compare the actors, their relationships, and the degree of certainty to the answer choices.

(A) someone who, after learning that many others had
      withdrawn their applications for a particular job,
      applied for the job in the belief that there would
      be less competition for it
(B) an art dealer who, after paying a very high price for
      a new painting, sells it at a very low price because
      it is now considered to be an inferior work
(C) someone who, after buying a box of rare motorcycle
      parts at a very high price, is forced to sell them
      at a much lower price because of the sudden
      availability of cheap substitute parts
(D) a publisher who pays an extremely high price for a
      new novel only to sell copies at a price affordable
      to nearly everyone
(E) an airline that, after selling most of the tickets for
      seats on a plane at a very high price, must sell the
      remaining tickets at a very low price

Answer choice D nicely analogizes the Garbar's argumentation of turning an expensive single original product into a profitable business by selling many copies of that original at a lower price. All of the important actors from the tulip market are replicated: buyer/seller, original bulb, descendant bulb. The relationships are similarly analogous, with an expensive price for the original product and a much lower price for the copies. Additionally, noted that D does not imply that the buyer/seller is forced to do anything because of market conditions: this is the standard business model for this market, and thus the buyer/seller plans to sell the copies at a low price in order to recoup their high initial cost.

Answer choice C and E clearly violate this important relationship between the buyer/seller and his descendant bulbs: although Mackay describes Tulip Mania as forcing original buyers to sell at a low price, you must note that the question stem clearly limits our application of the ideas from within Garber's argument.

Answer choice A introduces extraneous elements: actors (other applicants) and a relationship in the decision making process (less market competition) that simply doesn't exist in the passage.

Answer choice B is the most attractive distractor, as it has many of the actors and relationships from the passage. However, it is missing the crucial descendant bulb actors, and actively misstates the relationship between the original high and subsequent low price. Garber's opinion is that the original bulb's owner created copies to sell them cheaply and recoup costs, not because others had judged the tulips to be inferior.

Reading Comprehension: Meaning of or Referring to

This is another post describing the classification system Zen of 180 uses for the reading comprehension section; if you're not sure how to approach studying for the LSAT, our 19 reading comprehension standards break it down into manageable chunks; also, our free online LSAT analyzer will let you know which types of passage structures give you the most trouble.
We'll be starting with a new passage today, one questioning whether the Netherland's tulip bulb craze could be characterized as a speculative bubble.

Meaning of or referring to questions are almost easy to identify, and oftentimes will have specific line references (e.g., "lines 30–36"), as does the example question we pulled from the sample questions LSAC provides on its website. For those questions, we suggest pausing after reading those lines, answering the question, and then return to reading the passage. It's easy to identify the "line reference" questions by just skimming through the question stems, as the numbers and/or parenthesis should jump out at you. We'll write another post about the other advantages to this strategy, but you can't always apply it to meaning of or referring to questions.

The concept behind this Canadian game show is pretty close to the LSAT's task of restating exactly what the author's evidence means.

Some sample question stems from modern LSATs are:

In using the phrase “[phrase]” (line 25), the author of passage A most clearly means to refer to [the actor's

The author most likely intends to include which one of the following [meanings] among the “[phrase]” referred to in line 50?
Which one of the following assertions from passage A most clearly exemplifies what the author of passage B means in calling [topic] a “[phrase]” (lines 30–33)?

This explicit evidence task most often requires the examinee to consider the question stem's highlighted text within the somewhat narrow context of the lines surrounding it; rarely, however, the question will require the reader to orient the highlighted text within the passage's overall argument. As such, it's often quite helpful to actively read the passage and highlight changes in topic and structure, as meaning of or referring to questions will necessarily be explicit pieces of evidence that the author uses to build his or her argument.

The question stem for today's sample provides some helpful focusing issues for the reader.

6. The phrase “standard pricing pattern“ as used in line 38 most
    nearly means a pricing pattern

Before we can even get to the sample question today, though, we of course need to go over the passage. As a reminder, the Zen system suggests skimming the question stems for the entire passage, taking note of the ones with line references, and then notating the passage with the question numbers along the the passage's margins. In this case, you should actively read the passage up until about about line 40, then move on to answer the question before continuing:

       In economics, the term “speculative bubble“
       refers to a large upward move in an asset’s price
       driven not by the asset’s fundamentals—that is, by
       the earnings derivable from the asset—but rather by
(5)   mere speculation that someone else will be willing to
       pay a higher price for it. The price increase is then
       followed by a dramatic decline in price, due to a loss
       in confidence that the price will continue to rise, and
       the “bubble“ is said to have burst. According to
(10) Charles Mackay’s classic nineteenth-century account,
       the seventeenth-century Dutch tulip market provides
       an example of a speculative bubble. But the
       economist Peter Garber challenges Mackay’s view,
       arguing that there is no evidence that the Dutch tulip
(15) market really involved a speculative bubble.

       By the seventeenth century, the Netherlands had
       become a center of cultivation and development of
       new tulip varieties, and a market had developed in
       which rare varieties of bulbs sold at high prices. For
(20) example, a Semper Augustus bulb sold in 1625 for an
       amount of gold worth about U.S. $11,000 in 1999.
       Common bulb varieties, on the other hand, sold for
       very low prices. According to Mackay, by 1636 rapid
       price rises attracted speculators, and prices of many
(25) varieties surged upward from November 1636 through
       January 1637. Mackay further states that in February
       1637 prices suddenly collapsed; bulbs could not be
       sold at 10 percent of their peak values. By 1739, the
       prices of all the most prized kinds of bulbs had fallen
(30) to no more than one two-hundredth of 1 percent of
       Semper Augustus’s peak price.

       Garber acknowledges that bulb prices increased
       dramatically from 1636 to 1637 and eventually
       reached very low levels. But he argues that this
(35) episode should not be described as a speculative
       bubble, for the increase and eventual decline in bulb
       prices can be explained in terms of the fundamentals.
6.    Garber argues that a standard pricing pattern occurs
       for new varieties of flowers. When a particularly
(40) prized variety is developed, its original bulb sells for
       a high price. Thus, the dramatic rise in the price of
       some original tulip bulbs could have resulted as tulips
       in general, and certain varieties in particular, became
       fashionable.

The passage clearly sets up a debate between Mackay and Garber on whether Tulip Mania was a speculative bubble. However, for our purposes today, we're only interested in what the author and Garber meant by describing the tulip's market as a "standard pricing pattern."

6. The phrase “standard pricing pattern“ as used in line 38 most
    nearly means a pricing pattern

(A) against which other pricing patterns are to be measured
(B) that conforms to a commonly agreed-upon criterion
(C) that is merely acceptable
(D) that regularly recurs in certain types of cases
(E) that serves as an exemplar

Answer choice D nicely restates the author's and Garbar's meaning of "standard" with regularly recurs, and "certain types of cases" maps on to the "for a new variety of flowers" in the passage. Note that Garbar is refuting Mackay's stance by saying that Tulip Mania actually conforms to normal, rational economic behavior within the wider flower market. 

Answer choice E is an excellent distractor: however, "exemplar" implies that some actor was actively trying to create the standard market conditions. Garbar is not arguing that the market was following an exemplar, but rather that it was an example of the expected operations. 

Answer choice A follows this same erroneous reasoning, but the language is much more clearly out of the scope of what Garbar's argument is meaning: we're only talking about the tulip market and not measuring other markets against any standard.

Answer choice B falsely implies that the argument used only one criterion to define the standard, as well implied that others have settled on this after deliberation. We're not told how or why this standard was defined, and thus the answer choice can't impute things that are not present in the passage text.

Answer choice C incorrectly brings a value judgment component to the "standard," which much more closely tracks the "normal" meaning of the word rather than the evaluative meaning.