Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I've been practicing the Berkeley Review Verbal passages for a few weeks now and there will be times where the explanation for why one answer is more correct than the other seems very subjective.
For example, one passage (Diagnostic set 1, passage 5) talked about scientific experiments in which meditation was shown to have actual physiological effects. One question (Q27) provided new information stating that methods other than meditation can also produce the same physiological effects, and then asked for the closest analogy.
I chose "sexual arousal by a number of stimuli normally not considered to be erotic, such as fetishes, has been observed in a small but significant number of people", based on the reasoning that both meditation and other methods are able to produce a change in the body despite not normally being associated with having the ability to do so.
The correct answer was "morphine is a universally effective pain-killer, because it binds to receptor sites in the brain that also bind endogenous morphine-like molecules", based on the reasoning that both morphine and meditation are exogenous stimuli that induce universal physiological responses in natural endogenous systems.
To me this seems like a very arbitrary line of reasoning, and is arguable. I've also had the same problems with other questions in TBR. I understand that many people don't like TBR verbal review, but I don't want to take the risk of blaming my problems on the study material.
Has anyone else had this problem with TBR, or any other verbal material in general? I often seem to apply a line of reasoning that is different from the official explanation, and the official explanation doesn't convince me that my method was faulty. I've been keeping a log of questions I get wrong (type of question, why I got it wrong, tip for next time), but even when I apply this knowledge (including all the tips I get from premed101 and studentdoctor forums) to new questions I still seem to get them wrong.
Is it TBR? Is it me?
Sorry for the long post, I'm just getting a little frustrated. I hope I can get some advice that will help me and other people here too.
P.s. I wanted to start with BR so I don't burn through all the practices too quickly, and to ease into the mindset for verbal. I plan to do TBR --> EK --> TPR --> AAMC. It's just now I'm doubting if starting with the worst material will actually be a disadvantage. Does anyone have any suggestions?
For example, one passage (Diagnostic set 1, passage 5) talked about scientific experiments in which meditation was shown to have actual physiological effects. One question (Q27) provided new information stating that methods other than meditation can also produce the same physiological effects, and then asked for the closest analogy.
I chose "sexual arousal by a number of stimuli normally not considered to be erotic, such as fetishes, has been observed in a small but significant number of people", based on the reasoning that both meditation and other methods are able to produce a change in the body despite not normally being associated with having the ability to do so.
The correct answer was "morphine is a universally effective pain-killer, because it binds to receptor sites in the brain that also bind endogenous morphine-like molecules", based on the reasoning that both morphine and meditation are exogenous stimuli that induce universal physiological responses in natural endogenous systems.
To me this seems like a very arbitrary line of reasoning, and is arguable. I've also had the same problems with other questions in TBR. I understand that many people don't like TBR verbal review, but I don't want to take the risk of blaming my problems on the study material.
Has anyone else had this problem with TBR, or any other verbal material in general? I often seem to apply a line of reasoning that is different from the official explanation, and the official explanation doesn't convince me that my method was faulty. I've been keeping a log of questions I get wrong (type of question, why I got it wrong, tip for next time), but even when I apply this knowledge (including all the tips I get from premed101 and studentdoctor forums) to new questions I still seem to get them wrong.
Is it TBR? Is it me?
Sorry for the long post, I'm just getting a little frustrated. I hope I can get some advice that will help me and other people here too.
P.s. I wanted to start with BR so I don't burn through all the practices too quickly, and to ease into the mindset for verbal. I plan to do TBR --> EK --> TPR --> AAMC. It's just now I'm doubting if starting with the worst material will actually be a disadvantage. Does anyone have any suggestions?
