Critique ·Author thinks "outcomes analysis" is misguided
I take it that "outcomes analysis" is Zirkel's social science technique. I predict that the next paragraph will tell us why the author thinks that's misguided.
Ah, this makes sense. The cases are too different: quality of evidence; attitude of judge; types of cases; etc. For "outcome analysis" to be predictively useful, a major assumption is that the cases are relevantly similar.
Researcher reads opinions to figure out which variables the judge thought was important in deciding the case. It then uses statistical methods to figure out the causal impact of those variables.
Researcher reads transcripts to figure out which variables and kinds of evidence contributed to the verdict. Presumably the researchers also use statistical tools to figure out causal impact.
Benefit ·These methods can help parties assess outcome of a potential case
Passage Style
Critique or Debate
Problem-Analysis
20.
Which one of the following ████ █████████ ███ ████████████ ██ ███ ████████
Question Type
Describe organization
Structure
Rely on your low-res summary to help with this question. P1 introduces “outcomes analysis.” P2 presents criticism of “outcomes analysis.” P3 presents two approaches that the author finds more useful than “outcomes analysis.”
a
A technique is ███████████ ███ ████████████ ███ ███████████ ███ ████████████ ███ ██████████
This is the best answer. “Outcomes analysis” is introduced in P1. Its shortcomings are identified in P2. And the author presents two alternative analysis techniques in P3.
b
A debate is ███████████ ████████ ██ ██████████ ███ █ ██████████ ██ ████████
The easiest way to eliminate this is to recognize that there’s no “compromise” reached. The author doesn’t compromise on “outcomes analysis.” She presents two other techniques she believes are more useful.
c
A theory is ██████████ █████████████ ██ █████████ ███ █ ████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██ ██████████
The easiest way to eliminate this is to recognize that there’s no suggestion for further evaluation at the end. The author criticizes “outcomes analysis” and then discusses two better methods.
The easiest way to eliminate this is to recognize that there’s no amending of criteria at the end. The author criticizes “outcomes analysis” and then discusses two better methods.
e
A position is ███████████ ███ ████████████ ███ ████████████ ███ ███ █████████ ██ ████████
The easiest way to eliminate this is to recognize that there’s no revising of the author’s challenge to “outcomes analysis” at the end. The author criticizes “outcomes analysis” and then discusses two better methods.
Difficulty
97% of people who answer get this correct
This is a moderately difficult question.
It is similar in difficulty to other questions in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%136
142
75%149
Analysis
Describe organization
Structure
Critique or Debate
Law
Problem-Analysis
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
97%
168
b
1%
157
c
1%
150
d
0%
141
e
1%
160
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.