UCAT: Verbal Reasoning

[garmonbozia]

Three of the 4 answers involve previous knowledge
- Surface of Mercury is hot : This can be true since night-time -170oC is hotter than absolute Kelvin zero; you view that as wrong only based on your human experience pre-knowledge that -170oC is not hot
- Mercury day is longer than Mercury year : The passage doesn't define what makes a day or a year, only gives orbit & rotation times
- Melting point of ice.

So if we were to not use any pre-knowledge that question can't be answered at all.

That isn't 'previous knowledge' in the sense of 'you need to know obscure extra details about this topic in order to answer the questions', it's literally just common sense knowledge that any functioning human being possesses.

 

[N182]

That isn't 'previous knowledge' in the sense of 'you need to know obscure extra details about this topic in order to answer the questions', it's literally just common sense knowledge that any functioning human being possesses.

I would say a lot of non-science students don't know that a day is the rotation of a planet about its axis. This fact is not necessary for most people.

 

[garmonbozia]

I would say a lot of non-science students don't know that a day is the rotation of a planet about its axis. This fact is not necessary for most people.

Sure, that might be the case. I am pointing out that it is impossible to construct a question stimulus which literally relies on no 'previous knowledge' under A1's definition. That is why there is a certain standard of elementary general knowledge assumed by the UCAT, such as knowing the melting point of ice, knowing what is meant by the word 'hot' in everyday language, and also just knowing the definitions of the words used in the passage (e.g. it is assumed that the test-taker knows what is meant by 'proximity', 'twilight', 'hampers', and so on). 'Previous knowledge', in the interpretation of the UCAT consortium, is specific factual knowledge outside of common sense and word definitions - 'the melting point of ice is zero degrees Celsius' is not previous knowledge, while 'the Messenger mission to Mars cost $450 million USD' is.

A1's comment: I wasn't making such definition, only replying to whys' saying they "thought we were not required to bring in previous knowledge that is not explicitly referenced in the passage".

 

[N182]

Sure, that might be the case. I am pointing out that it is impossible to construct a question stimulus which literally relies on no 'previous knowledge' under A1's definition. That is why there is a certain standard of elementary general knowledge assumed by the UCAT, such as knowing the melting point of ice, knowing what is meant by the word 'hot' in everyday language, and also just knowing the definitions of the words used in the passage (e.g. it is assumed that the test-taker knows what is meant by 'proximity', 'twilight', 'hampers', and so on). 'Previous knowledge', in the interpretation of the UCAT consortium, is specific factual knowledge outside of common sense and word definitions - 'the melting point of ice is zero degrees Celsius' is not previous knowledge, while 'the Messenger mission to Mars cost $450 million USD' is.

Ok good point.

 

[nb]

Hello. I have recently come across this question.
Now in the passage it states that there is a loss of.... not a "reduced number". So shouldn't the answer be false? Although a loss is technically a reduced number, I still think the phrase "a reduced number" gives the wrong idea.

 

[N182]

Hello. I have recently come across this question.
Now in the passage it states that there is a loss of.... not a "reduced number". So shouldn't the answer be false? Although a loss is technically a reduced number, I still think the phrase "a reduced number" gives the wrong idea.

Your thinking too hard about it. If two statements are synonymous then I would go with true.

 

[nb]

Your thinking too hard about it. If two statements are synonymous then I would go with true.

Hm alright. Yeah I do think I tend to overthink lots of these VR questions, but its hard to find that line between overthinking and simply being wary of any sneaky 'tricks' they put into the questions.

 

[ucatboy]

Hello. I have recently come across this question.
Now in the passage it states that there is a loss of.... not a "reduced number". So shouldn't the answer be false? Although a loss is technically a reduced number, I still think the phrase "a reduced number" gives the wrong idea.

Hey we just learned about about that in class

But yeah "a loss of" is basically synonymous with "reduced number"

 

[TKAO]

Hey we just learned about about that in class

But yeah "a loss of" is basically synonymous with "reduced number"

Flexing that Monash knowledge I see hahaha

 

[ucatboy]

Flexing that Monash knowledge I see hahaha

Damn why you gotta call me out like that hahaha

 

[N182]

Hi, I have a similar question to noodleboy, where the passage says 'popular' but the question says 'best,' couldn't something be very popular but not very good? Also does anyone have any general tips on what would count as an inference and what would count as an assumption? Thanks
Passage:
“UCL Medical School has become one of the most popular institutes in the UK. With
recent investment in a new Medical Library, and development of the lecture theatres
UCL is becoming a genuine dream medical school for any UK applicants”

Question: UCL Medical School is one of the best in the UK

 

[Sokka]

Hi, I have a similar question to noodleboy, where the passage says 'popular' but the question says 'best,' couldn't something be very popular but not very good? Also does anyone have any general tips on what would count as an inference and what would count as an assumption? Thanks
Passage:
“UCL Medical School has become one of the most popular institutes in the UK. With
recent investment in a new Medical Library, and development of the lecture theatres
UCL is becoming a genuine dream medical school for any UK applicants”

Question: UCL Medical School is one of the best in the UK

Yeah you’re right it’s a can’t tell whether if it’s the best. As for explaining inferences/assumptions,
Consider the stem “all bears have brown fur”
- if a question were to say “no bears have black fur”, that’s an inference which is fair to make
- however, if a question were to say “all bears have brown skin”- this would be can’t tell as it is an assumption
This might not be the best example but I hope it gets the job done in explaining the concepts to you

 

[nb]

Yeah you’re right it’s a can’t tell whether if it’s the best. As for explaining inferences/assumptions,
Consider the stem “all bears have brown fur”
- if a question were to say “no bears have black fur”, that’s an inference which is fair to make
- however, if a question were to say “all bears have brown skin”- this would be can’t tell as it is an assumption
This might not be the best example but I hope it gets the job done in explaining the concepts to you

Are you sure about this? Because one could argue that a bear can have brown AND black fur... So the inference that "no bears have black fur" would actually not be a correct inference.... IF you said "no bears have ONLY black fur", then that would be a correct inference. I see what you are trying to say, but an example of where you COULD do this was if a question said "All the students at the school were boys". A fair inference to then make would be that "no students in the school were girls", as one can't be a boy and a girl simultaneously, but a bear can have black and brown fur simultaneously. Hope that makes sense?

 

[N182]

Are you sure about this? Because one could argue that a bear can have brown AND black fur... So the inference that "no bears have black fur" would actually not be a correct inference.... IF you said "no bears have ONLY black fur", then that would be a correct inference. I see what you are trying to say, but an example of where you COULD do this was if a question said "All the students at the school were boys". A fair inference to then make would be that "no students in the school were girls", as one can't be a boy and a girl simultaneously, but a bear can have black and brown fur simultaneously. Hope that makes sense?

Thats the annoying part about VR. Some passages might mean having brown fur means ONLY having brown fur while others might allow for bears to have multiple. It is quite tricky and maybe even arbitary.

 

[nb]

Thats the annoying part about VR. Some passages might mean having brown fur means ONLY having brown fur while others might allow for bears to have multiple. It is quite tricky and maybe even arbitary.

Yeah I agree. This is an even bigger issue in DM questions... But for me, thinking it through thoroughly (and in this case, realising that bears can indeed have multiple colours) has more often than not resulted in the correct answer. In other words, I don't think you should try to second guess yourself and think "maybe I'm thinking this too hard and the exam writers probably didn't be think this much into it and so the simpler one should be the right answer".

 

[nb]

Although it states that almost all salt is made from atlantic cod (Which is the first part of the question), we cant infer that not all atlantic cod NOT made into salt cod... It may be the case that all Atlantic cod is indeed turned into salt cod and that almost all salt cod is made from atalantic cod (where the remaining salt cod may be made from something else). Can someone help?

 

[N182]

Although it states that almost all salt is made from atlantic cod (Which is the first part of the question), we cant infer that not all atlantic cod NOT made into salt cod... It may be the case that all Atlantic cod is indeed turned into salt cod and that almost all salt cod is made from atalantic cod (where the remaining salt cod may be made from something else). Can someone help?View attachment 3429

It says in the 3rd paragraph that atlantic cod is prepared in many different ways e.g. baked in balls etc. which is a different technique from making salt cod.

 

[nb]

It says in the 3rd paragraph that atlantic cod is prepared in many different ways e.g. baked in balls etc. which is a different technique from making salt cod.

Yes I agree that other things can make salt cod, however that doesn't rule out the fact that ALL atalantic cod is turned into salt cod... That can still be the case.

 

[someday]

Yes I agree that other things can make salt cod, however that doesn't rule out the fact that ALL atalantic cod is turned into salt cod... That can still be the case.

correct me if I'm wrong (English is my 2nd language lol), but when the passage says "virtually all salt cod...", I think the word "virtually" has a similar connotation to "pretty much". I think the passage is saying "pretty much all salt cold is ..." or alternatively "nearly all salt cod is..."

 

[nb]

correct me if I'm wrong (English is my 2nd language lol), but when the passage says "virtually all salt cod...", I think the word "virtually" has a similar connotation to "pretty much". I think the passage is saying "pretty much all salt cold is ..." or alternatively "nearly all salt cod is..."

Nearly all salt cod is made from atlantic cod. This means that there is salt cod that is made from other stuff. But that doesn't rule out the fact that ALL atlantic cod can be turned into salt cod. Lets say you have 10 atalantic cod, and there are 15 salt cod. It is possible that ALL 10 of the atlantic cod are turned into salt cod and the remaning 5 salt cod come from other things...