UCAT: Decision Making

[fm8]

so for the second conclusion I put no is does not follow, but I got it wrong.
Should I assume with these type of syllogyms that there are no other type of vehicles? what is there were red motor bikes?

 

[JeydinNewWon]

so for the second conclusion I put no is does not follow, but I got it wrong.
Should I assume with these type of syllogyms that there are no other type of vehicles? what is there were red motor bikes?

View attachment 4674

This is rather iffy. We don’t know if there are other vehicles other than cars and vans so I would be inclined to say yours is more correct.

 

[fm8]

This is rather iffy. We don’t know if there are other vehicles other than cars and vans so I would be inclined to say yours is more correct.

thats what i thought. but this question comes from the official ucat question banks ucatboy can i get your input please?

 

[Rei]

Ill say no, because yes, there could be more vehicles or the only vehicles could be the ones mentioned. So it is really inconclusive
so No is the best answer

 

[fm8]

hey, was wondering if anyone knows a time efficient strategy for these types of Venn diagrams ?

 

[cocodreams]

We know that if a math proof employs colours, it must be a diagram. However, there is also a possibility that even if a math proof doesn't employ colours, it could be a diagram. Hence, for the second statement, I put No, because a math proof can be a diagram with colours or without colours. Does this make sense or am I interpreting it wrong? Thanks!

 

[JeydinNewWon]

We know that if a math proof employs colours, it must be a diagram. However, there is also a possibility that even if a math proof doesn't employ colours, it could be a diagram. Hence, for the second statement, I put No, because a math proof can be a diagram with colours or without colours. Does this make sense or am I interpreting it wrong? Thanks!
View attachment 4679

I think I can correct your misunderstanding. The statement is asking if a given math proof fits either 'diagram' or 'not employ colours'. Since a math proof without colours can still be considered a diagram, it fits the 'diagram' condition and the statement is still correct. If a math proof doesn't employ colours and is not a diagram then it fits the 'does not employ colours' condition and is still correct. For these types of statements, I would think of it as a case of "if it fits the condition". So the answer would be a YES.

 

[cocodreams]

I think I can correct your misunderstanding. The statement is asking if a given math proof fits either 'diagram' or 'not employ colours'. Since a math proof without colours can still be considered a diagram, it fits the 'diagram' condition and the statement is still correct. If a math proof doesn't employ colours and is not a diagram then it fits the 'does not employ colours' condition and is still correct. For these types of statements, I would think of it as a case of "if it fits the condition". So the answer would be a YES.

Oh I believe I misinterpreted the question and as you said, it's about 'fitting the condition'. So technically, this statement fits the condition that math diagrams can be non-coloured or they can be a diagram with colour?

 

[cocodreams]

Is it actually possible that there are no M which are not X, even though the stem says, 'all M which are not X...',

 

[cocodreams]

hey, was wondering if anyone knows a time efficient strategy for these types of Venn diagrams ?



View attachment 4678

I think for these types, if it takes a long time to solve, you can skip (and come back later) or just be very careful and focused in reading the options and what the shapes represent.

 

[JeydinNewWon]

EDIT: Sorry, made a mistake and posted this. Mods can delete if they can.

 

[cocodreams]

According to Pearson's definition of some "more than one but less than all", wouldn't this statement be 'No' because we only know that THIS meal is nutritious etc. We don't know about other meals and since this is just ONE meal, this doesn't include some?


Also, for the statement below, doesn't it imply that 'some nutritious things which are good for you are NOT meals'? We don't know if ALL nutritious things are meals or not. It could be that ALL nutritious things = meals, thus this statement would also be 'No'?


If we don't take the UCAT definitions into account, I believe these above answers in the images would be correct. But considering Pearson's definitions, I think I am correct? Any views on this will really be appreciated!

 

[JeydinNewWon]

According to Pearson's definition of some "more than one but less than all", wouldn't this statement be 'No' because we only know that THIS meal is nutritious etc. We don't know about other meals and since this is just ONE meal, this doesn't include some?
View attachment 4683

Also, for the statement below, doesn't it imply that 'some nutritious things which are good for you are NOT meals'? We don't know if ALL nutritious things are meals or not. It could be that ALL nutritious things = meals, thus this statement would also be 'No'?
View attachment 4684

If we don't take the UCAT definitions into account, I believe these above answers in the images would be correct. But considering Pearson's definitions, I think I am correct? Any views on this will really be appreciated!

I don't know how correct the Pearson definitions are, considering they contradict themselves in the Mocks and Question Banks. I was going to reply to your previous post about the 'either' case but realised that Pearson's definitions don't line up with my explanation. However, going through the mocks and question banks, I'm sure that their definitions are not entirely correct. For example, Pearson stated that 'either' was exclusively one or the other, however, in mock C:


Statement 3 won't be correct according to Pearson's definitions. However, the answers say otherwise.

Similarly in the DM Question Bank, Pearson's definition for 'some' would not be true for Statement 1, since it is only one example, however this is not the case:


AS we can see, UCAT definitions are contradictory to their question banks and mocks. However, since the mocks and question banks were recently refurbished and updated to a higher standard, I'd say they are more correct. And come on, 'some' clearly includes even one example in our modern language.

Hope this helps! I'll answer specifically in regards to the question you posted a little later.

 

[cocodreams]

I don't know how correct the Pearson definitions are, considering they contradict themselves in the Mocks and Question Banks. I was going to reply to your previous post about the 'either' case but realised that Pearson's definitions don't line up with my explanation. However, going through the mocks and question banks, I'm sure that their definitions are not entirely correct. For example, Pearson stated that 'either' was exclusively one or the other, however, in mock C:
View attachment 4685

Statement 3 won't be correct according to Pearson's definitions. However, the answers say otherwise.

Similarly in the DM Question Bank, Pearson's definition for 'some' would not be true for Statement 1, since it is only one example, however this is not the case:
View attachment 4686

AS we can see, UCAT definitions are contradictory to their question banks and mocks. However, since the mocks and question banks were recently refurbished and updated to a higher standard, I'd say they are more correct. And come on, 'some' clearly includes even one example in our modern language.

Hope this helps! I'll answer specifically in regards to the question you posted a little later.

Yeah, I am really confused since it's very contradictory! So you're saying some includes 'one', because this is directly from the pearson website:

But thanks for the screenshots and info!

 

[JeydinNewWon]

Yeah, I am really confused since it's very contradictory! So you're saying some includes 'one', because this is directly from the pearson website:
View attachment 4688
But thanks for the screenshots and info!

Yeah...well literally in the Question Bank they contradicted this, LOL. (The useful and trendy product question). The premise stated that there existed a useful and trendy product and it is substandard. The first statement proceeded to say 'some substandard products are useful and trendy'. We only know ONE exists and so according to the Pearson definition, this would be wrong, however, this is clearly not the case as in the screenshot I sent, it said "YES".

I'm more inclined to say the Question Banks would be correct as opposed to the definitions, as these have been updated very recently.

TL;DR: "Some" will still be correct only if there is one.

 

[cocodreams]

Yeah...well literally in the Question Bank they contradicted this, LOL. (The useful and trendy product question). The premise stated that there existed a useful and trendy product and it is substandard. The first statement proceeded to say 'some substandard products are useful and trendy'. We only know ONE exists and so according to the Pearson definition, this would be wrong, however, this is clearly not the case as in the screenshot I sent, it said "YES".

I'm more inclined to say the Question Banks would be correct as opposed to the definitions, as these have been updated very recently.

TL;DR: "Some" will still be correct only if there is one.

I have emailed them, and I am still skeptical about saying "some" is correct if there's only 'one'. I'll have to wait for their reply

 

[JeydinNewWon]

I have emailed them, and I am still skeptical about saying "some" is correct if there's only 'one'. I'll have to wait for their reply

I mean, I'm not really sceptical since why on earth would "some" arbitrarily mean "more than one but less than all" - that straight up doesn't make sense on why the line is drawn there.

 

[cocodreams]

I mean, I'm not really sceptical since why on earth would "some" arbitrarily mean "more than one but less than all" - that straight up doesn't make sense on why the line is drawn there.

Yeah I understand what you mean and I definitely agree with you, but we're in the UCAT world where we need to and the question banks really should, follow the definition they've given on the website

 

[JeydinNewWon]

Yeah I understand what you mean and I definitely agree with you, but we're in the UCAT world where we need to and the question banks really should, follow the definition they've given on the website

Yeah, but their definition for “either” is also incorrect. So who knows what flaws could occur for their other definitions.

 

[Anonymous987]

Hello guys, any tips to improve syllogisms and interpreting information (basically all drag and drop questions). Because this is what is dragging my overall score down to around 720ish points (getting around 4/9 right in total for those types of questions)Thank you !