AAMC CARS imply/infer vs. suggest

Post Reply
shaun.deveshwar
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:38 pm

AAMC CARS imply/infer vs. suggest

Post by shaun.deveshwar » Mon Jun 24, 2019 3:02 pm

I was hoping to see if you had any suggestions on tackling questions with "imply" "infer" and "suggest" with AAMC CARs in particular. I have noticed that most of the time when they are saying something is "suggested" in a RWT or CMP question it is more times than not in the passage and directly or nearly identical to where the question stem prompts you to go.
However, for the ones that say infer or imply, those typically involve going a big outside of the passage. Is this something to be on the look out for when questions are prompted as implied/inferred instead of simply suggested?

Thank you for the help and clarification once again.

- Shaun
shaun.deveshwar
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: AAMC CARS imply/infer vs. suggest

Post by shaun.deveshwar » Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:02 pm

I also have two other questions.

One is relatively generic. How well do we need to be familiar with the structure of intermediates for all of the biochemically pathways?
In the section bank, there were some very specific questions regarding which pathways use similar enzymes and substrates, as well as the structure of fumarate in a discrete question, so I was just wondering about that.


My other question is about the attributional biases and the actor-observer bias. I understand that attributional errors occur when we try to interpret other people's actions, and at times use dispositional information instead of the situation to form judgments, but I generally always thought of the self-serving bias, just world phenomenon, and fundamental attribution biases under this topic.

Thank you for the clarification.
NS_Tutor_Mathias
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 8:39 pm

Re: AAMC CARS imply/infer vs. suggest

Post by NS_Tutor_Mathias » Tue Jun 25, 2019 6:16 am

For the CARS question, if you have some question #s in mind, that would be helpful - I don't want to inadvertently mislead you here. In general, there are more context clues than just a single word available to determine how big a leap you should be making, and if you provide me with some SB problem numbers I can maybe take a stab at pointing those out. As a rule, CARS very rarely wants you to reason far outside the text, even for "Reasoning beyond the Text" questions.
shaun.deveshwar wrote:
Mon Jun 24, 2019 6:02 pm
I also have two other questions.

One is relatively generic. How well do we need to be familiar with the structure of intermediates for all of the biochemically pathways?
In the section bank, there were some very specific questions regarding which pathways use similar enzymes and substrates, as well as the structure of fumarate in a discrete question, so I was just wondering about that.
That is not as daunting a question as it sounds. You should be intimately familiar with a few key substrates - at least glucose, citric acid, pyruvate, acetyl-CoA, DHAP, G3P. And you should be able to tell which steps of the TCA involve decarboxylation and which ones oxidation, as well as the odd ones out (hydration!). As a rule, anytime you encounter a substrate, it's name should make perfect sense to you and you should reason out how and why it was produced. There is no need to memorize the exact structure, but there is a great need to be able to deduce how a structure might look given some surrounding information.

Let's try to figure out fumarate, knowing only citric acid:
We know citric acid has 6 carbons, and should probably be able to draw some form of it (I like the little 5-point W, with the third carboxylate coming off the middle - just how I memorized it). We know two decarboxylations will happen, so we'll be down to 4 carbons - that's succinate, a 4-carbon dicarboxylic acid. Now we know a single oxidation step occurs, catalyzed by succinate dehydrogenase - and conveniently, there is only a single location where this can happen in succinate, namely in the middle, between carbon 2&3.

You can keep going from here and guess at the structure of oxaloacetate: You might know it is the product of hydration of fumarate, and since fumarate is symmetrical, wherever this hydration happens yields the same product. And in case there is ever any confusion, it's also in the name: Oxalate and acetate.

Here is a hasty late-night sketch:
citrate_to_fumarate.png
(130.04 KiB) Not downloaded yet
My other question is about the attributional biases and the actor-observer bias. I understand that attributional errors occur when we try to interpret other people's actions, and at times use dispositional information instead of the situation to form judgments, but I generally always thought of the self-serving bias, just world phenomenon, and fundamental attribution biases under this topic.

Thank you for the clarification.
I'm not sure what the question here is. You are right they are similar. The MCAT wants you to make distinctions among fairly similar-sounding and closely related concepts: Self-serving bias describes how we evaluate ourselves more forgivingly (read: more situationally). Actor-observer bias says that we will use dispositional attributions for others and situational attributions for ourselves, while the fundamental attribution error is just about how we make attributions about others. So while these 3 topics may be discussing practically the same phenomenon, we can distinguish which is why by just asking who the actors involved are - only the self, only the other, or both.

All the P/S vocabulary is about playing this kind of game: Knowing distinctions between like terms.
shaun.deveshwar
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: AAMC CARS imply/infer vs. suggest

Post by shaun.deveshwar » Tue Jun 25, 2019 8:26 am

Ok that makes sense.

An example of a CARs question like that I was talking about is in CARS Vol Pack 2 question 115.
NS_Tutor_Mathias
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Mar 30, 2019 8:39 pm

Re: AAMC CARS imply/infer vs. suggest

Post by NS_Tutor_Mathias » Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:55 pm

This is very much an extract the argument sort of question, where you want to identify very precisely WHICH argument to look for and to not get side-tracked by attractive-seeming, or passage-agreeing statements. The best contrast to this would be "what would the author most agree with"-style questions: In those you do the opposite, and interpret much more loosely.

So when you see a very clear, specific relationship mentioned, such as language to complex thought and culture, go and just commit to the text evidence: In this case the author says that learning and 'to impose an unprecedented degree of artificiality on the world' are this second evolutionary innovation, and goes on in the next sentence to say that language is a "vital part of this facility". A less fancy way of saying all that is that learning makes humans oh-so-smart and language is key to their learning. That is the author's argument here.

As a rule, you are best served ALWAYS assuming that there is direct text evidence for the question you are being asked, unless you are being fairly explicitly told to imagine a much broader argument that the author might agree with.
shaun.deveshwar
Posts: 103
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: AAMC CARS imply/infer vs. suggest

Post by shaun.deveshwar » Wed Jun 26, 2019 9:01 am

gotcha thank you.
Post Reply