PrepTest 151

[lcid:3700] Prep Test 151 LSAT — Reading Comp — S1 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 22-27  .       According to the generally accepted theory of  . plate tectonics, the earth's crust consists of a dozen Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Background info on "plate tectonics" and central question (why some areas have lots of subduction but no earthquakes)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Definitions:
      • Plate tectonics: The earth's crust features many plates of solid rock that move across the mantle (first sentence)
      • Mantle: The slightly fluid layer of rock between crust and core (first sentence)
      • Subduction: The process in which two plates collide and one plate is forced under the other until it merges with the mantle (third and fourth sentences)
      • Earth's seismic "hot zones": Regions with very high levels of subduction (fifth sentence)
    • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to the theory of plate tectonics:
      • Earthquakes are caused by two plates grinding against each other as they collide, which causes subduction, which causes an enormous build-up of energy abruptly released as an earthquake (second and fifth sentences)
    • Author attitude: "generally accepted" (first sentence); "contrary to expectations" (sixth sentence); "crucial question" (last sentence); "no answer" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Answer: Earthquakes are caused by subduction from plates moving in the opposite direction, not the same direction
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparisons of two subduction types:
      • When plates move toward each other, the resulting subduction is relatively motionless and shallow, the amount of friction is higher, and the likelihood of earthquakes is increased (second, third, seventh, and last sentences)
        • This amount of resistance is compared to two pieces of sandpaper rubbing against each other (last sentence)
      • On the other hand, when plates move in the same direction, the resulting subduction is high velocity and steep, the amount of friction between places is lower, and there is a lower likelihood of earthquakes (fourth, fifth, and sixth sentences)
        • This type of deduction is compared to an oar being dipped in water from a moving boat (fifth sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Implications: Areas with "low" subduction may be at a greater risk of earthquakes than previously thought
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's attitude: "provides a warning" (first sentence); "may in fact be at a significant risk of earthquakes" (last sentence)

Main Point: Some scientists believe that the type of subduction caused by two plates moving in the same direction can explain why some regions feature intense subduction and relatively few earthquakes.

Key Lines?

Paragraph 1, Sentence 7 (P1, S7) - Question

P2, S8-9 - Answer

P3, S1 - Implications

Meta-Structure?

Question/Answer: We think the Question/Answer Meta-Structure is the closest fit for this passage*. In such a passage, the author will usually pose a question and consider one or more answers for the rest of the passage. And that's the approach that this author uses. After providing some background information on plate tectonics and seismic "hot zones," the author asks a question: "[H]ow can often intense subduction take place at certain locations with little or no seismic activity?" (P1, S7). The author uses the remaining two paragraphs to discuss the answer to this question.

In such a passage, the main point is typically the answer. Here, the author seems to buy the explanation offered by a group of scientists who believe earthquakes are more likely to occur when plates collide when sliding toward each other rather than sliding in the same direction. So, we've summarized that answer as, "Some scientists believe that the type of subduction caused by two plates moving in the same direction can explain why some regions feature intense subduction and relatively few earthquakes."

*Truthfully, about half of the Meta-Structures could describe this passage. Certainly, you could call this a Phenomenon/Explanation, Proposing a Hypothesis, Correcting the Record, Reporting a Viewpoint, or Old Approach/New Approach passage. One could even make a reasonable case that this is a Paradox/Resolution or Problem/Solution passage. Any one of these Meta-Structures could help us understand the passage's structure and main point. Ultimately we went with Question/Answer because the passage explicitly proposes a question and discusses the answer. But if you went with one of the other Meta-Structures, that's OK. Remember, the Meta-Structures are tools that help us think about the overarching structure and ideas in a passage. We don't have to agree on which Meta-Structure a passage has to realize the benefits of the Meta-Structures, as this passage illustrates.

Comparisons: This passage — especially the second paragraph — utilizes the comparison minor Meta-Structure extensively. Most of the comparisons deal with the difference between the two types of subduction zones. We will almost certainly get a few questions that relate to these differences, so let's review the details of each.

  • Head-on subduction:
    • More likely to lead to earthquakes.
    • Subduction is relatively motionless.
    • Subduction occurs at a shallower angle of descent.
    • There is a larger plane of contact with the plates and thus more friction and seismic activity.
  • Same-direction subduction
    • Less likely to lead to earthquakes.
    • Subduction occurs at a high velocity.
    • Subduction occurs at a steeper angle of descent.
    • There is less contact between the plats and thus less friction and seismic activity.

Last Thoughts?

Let's make sure we understand these two types of subduction for the inevitable Minor Point questions about them. A stumbling block for many test-takers is that the fast-moving, steep-descending plates that experience significant resistance from the mantle are less likely to cause earthquakes. Expect the test-writers to try to trick us by playing up that counterintuitive fact.

Question prompt

Based on the information Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Science

Strategy Overview

Review the main point, the purpose of the final paragraph, and the final sentence, using each to help analyze the answer choices

Answer Anticipation

These "new last sentence" questions can appear difficult, as it seems as if you're being asked to come up with something out of nothing. However, there's actually quite a lot we can rely on for these questions!First, the answer has to advance the main point. After all, the author will not conclude the passage with something contradictory or tangential to the main point. Second, it has to push forward the purpose of the final paragraph, as these questions almost always ask for something that could function coherently within that paragraph. Third, it has to make sense in the context of the current concluding line.In this case, the main point is that a new approach to understanding the link between subduction and earthquakes offers a promising explanation of why some places with intense subduction do not have many earthquakes and why some places with little subduction are at risk of earthquakes. The correct answer will need to be consistent with that main point. To the second and third criteria, the correct answer will have to connect to the ideas of the last paragraph — that regions previously considered innocuous may be dangerous. So let's find an answer choice that fits these criteria!

Answer choices

  1. A
    Depending on the relationship Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this answer choice match the main point while advancing the final line?

    Not at all. Although the passage discusses plate velocity, this idea isn't described in the last paragraph. The last paragraph instead focuses on the risk of earthquakes in regions previously thought to be safe. So, a discussion of increasing plate velocity is a nonsensical addition to the last paragraph.

  2. B
    The lower the level Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this answer choice match the main point while advancing the final line?

    Not really, although this answer choice understandably tempted a fair number of test-takers. It's true that the last sentence brings up "regions with low levels of subduction" (P3, S2), so (B) is relevant to the discussion at the end of the paragraph. However, the passage never implies that the level of subduction is correlated with the angle of subduction in this way. There may be areas of severe subduction that feature shallow-angle subduction (these areas would presumably be the most earthquake-prone). There could also be areas with very mild but steep subduction (these areas probably would not be very earthquake-prone). So, even though (B) is on-topic for the last paragraph, it doesn't conform to the facts the passage advances.

  3. C
    Any region where subduction Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does this answer choice match the main point while advancing the final line?

    Not quite. This answer choice seems like it matches the topic of the last paragraph, which led to many test-takers incorrectly choosing it. However, it is not consistent with the passage's main point. The passage doesn't hold that areas with low seismic activity could suddenly experience increased subduction. Consider how the last paragraph's "warning" about regions with low levels of subduction fits within the main point. Why might these areas be seismically volatile? Based on the main point, it would be because these regions could feature the shallow-angle subduction that results from plates moving toward each other. It has nothing to do with increasing subduction — it has to do with the angle of subduction. So, this answer choice is not consistent with the main point or the topic of the last paragraph.

  4. D
    Even at low levels, Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this answer choice match the main point while advancing the final line?

    Nope. This is far too strongly worded to match the main point. The main point didn't hold that subduction "inevitably results in a significant amount of seismic activity." Instead, the main point was that certain types of subduction could make earthquakes more probable.

  5. E
    Even in such a Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem

    (E) Does this answer choice match the main point while advancing the final line?

    Yep! This answer choice matches all three criteria. It's consistent with the main point, which holds that regions with low subduction may still be seismically volatile because they feature the shallow-angle subduction that results from plates moving toward each other. It advances the third paragraph's purpose, which is to provide a warning about these regions with low levels of subduction. It also follows naturally from the previous sentence by continuing the discussion of regions with low levels of subductions. (Notice how it uses referential language: "Even in such a region ..." This makes the answer choice a much more organic addition to that paragraph.) Since (E) matches all three criteria, we can confidently select it.

What this tests

Discussion

  • B? 4 replies

    Started by rebut

  • Why is B not correct 0 replies

    Started by Divya

  • Answer E 1 reply

    Started by Lucie