Triple Negatives

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Xivilus1231

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
31
Reaction score
9
Have anyone ever encountered triple negative questions while studying?

I observed a question in TBR Physics : Circuits chapter that went something like...

Which of the following would NOT decrease the power drop at a resistor?

Negatives (NOT, decrease, drop in power)

The subject matter was quite basic, nevertheless I sat dumbfounded thinking about it for 10 minutes. Luckily this was the only occurrence I have found, and I pray it doesn't catch on.

Of course, my neurosci professor once asked a question about an inhibitor of an inhibitor NOT having the following effects (a 'I only', 'I & II', 'I & III', or 'III only' type of question)

Members don't see this ad.
 
It's a bit much for me, but I think I understand why TBR would make a question like this. Good MCAT review materials will sometimes go further than the real MCAT in creating a puzzle out of a question prompt. It's like training for a marathon with ankle weights. I think the rationale at TBR is to help you learn to concentrate on the exact wording.

A question like this, though, would never show up on the real test. My feeling is that performance on this question wouldn't have a similar distribution to overall performance on the exam, so it would make bad statistics. I don't think it would make it through AAMC's process.
 
It's a bit much for me, but I think I understand why TBR would make a question like this. Good MCAT review materials will sometimes go further than the real MCAT in creating a puzzle out of a question prompt. It's like training for a marathon with ankle weights. I think the rationale at TBR is to help you learn to concentrate on the exact wording.

A question like this, though, would never show up on the real test. My feeling is that performance on this question wouldn't have a similar distribution to overall performance on the exam, so it would make bad statistics. I don't think it would make it through AAMC's process.

I am always leery to say those words, because there is no way to know what they would or wouldn't put on the exam. How do you know they won't ask that question? You can speculate and postulize, but in the end you have no way of knowing what any one of several test writers might choose to do (or has chosen to do). There is a statistical gatekeeper on any given standardized exam, but I would venture to guess that the question as written would get an acceptable distribution.

As for the question, it's not a triple negative or even a double negative. There is a "NOT" in the question. Asking "which will not decrease..." is less verbose than "which will increase or not change...". If AAMC questions are any indicator, then Which will not increase...? and Which will not decrease...? are fair game.

The question could be rewritten as: Which of the following would increase or not change the energy disspiated from a resistor? It's asking the same thing, but "Which of the following would NOT decrease the power drop at a resistor?" flows better.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Thanks for the replies,

What caused me to get snagged up on this particular question was not only the fact that it was a bit wordy, but that this question had two possible meanings, so if I only selected an answer choice that increases power loss at a resistor, it would be wrong.

My study habits are that I tend to read the answer explanations after I get something wrong twice in a row (yes I read TBR Physics I and II cover to cover at least twice). The first time around, I can usually reason why an answer choice was right or wrong.

So, only after reading the explanations did I realize this was an 'increase / does nothing type of question', but still I got it wrong a third time the final week before the test. I guess my brain refuses to willingly rationalize these types of questions.
 
I am always leery to say those words, because there is no way to know what they would or wouldn't put on the exam.

That's fair. I withdraw my comment.

The point I was trying to make, though, is that there is not one hundred percent overlap between the set of possible MCAT question and the set of good practice items. They are not exactly the same. There are practice questions that can make test-writer intentions apparent in a way that may be more overt than would happen on the test. There are also certain science concepts that should be practiced more often than their frequency on the test. There's an art to writing these things that isn't exact mimicry, which is what I was trying to get at, and that TBR always deserves the benefit of the doubt. All the best.
 
Perhaps I'm a little too involved here (I was one of the proof readers), so forgive me if I'm a bit overzealous in my responses. One of our tasks was to evaluate all of the questions within each chapter exam to ensure there were various ranges being covered; things like hard/easy, weird/straight forward, verbose/word economic, calculation/intuition, and so on. We scrutinized many questions, including the one being brought up here. There is no question that makes it into the books on accident. I think the word argument is a bit strong to describe it, but there were some passionate disagreements about certain questions when we got together. I'll say that there are some questions that had it been up to me would have been gone, but it wasn't up to me.

The primary reason for the wording of this question is to introduce the idea that "not decrease" does not necessarily mean to increase. There is also the option of no change to consider. Whether the question is about power drain, voltage drop, current, or whatever they choose to ask, the important thing here is being exposed to a slight twist on the traditional type of question.

You are correct that the probability of that wording is lower than traditional wording, which is why only a few questions in the entire physics book have this type of wording. But it is important to be exposed to weird wording about 5 to 10% of the time.
 
So I decided I wanted to post the exact question here, but having been through every question in the circuits chapter three times, I cannot find that question anywhere. I feel silly, because I'm guessing the OP has an older version of the book and that this question was editted out of the new book afterall. So after my millitant stance defending the question, it looks like my boss and Dr. Wetzel are on the same page and I'm standing alone on an island.
 
Even if by chance there was a question like this, just think of it like this, not doing something is the opposite of the what is happening. Not decreasing means stay the same or increase. I have not gotten up to tbr physics sections yet, but in doing the chemistry sections I have come along questions that are similar to this. Getting used to the way questions are worded is a skill one needs to aquire, especially I would think the the verbal reasoning section.
 
Top