AAMC FL 2 scored Questions [Spoilers]

[Spectar]

Hello everyone I have a few questions on the AAMC FL 2 scored exam.

Bio question 43: For this one, can someone explain it to me? I literally have no idea how this makes sense. How can you add a nucleotide to the open reading frame to induce a frameshift mutation without creating or eliminating a stop codon? Can someone explain the reasoning for the question overall as well?

P/S Question 10: Again I have almost no idea how to approach this problem. I understand that source monitoring errors are errors in which you recall information but mix up where the info came from. Why would old fictitious names be identified as famous more often than new fictitious names?

P/S Question 40: So I picked the wrong answer (A) thinking that because the groups of friends didn't exhibit the same problems associated with groupthink, those types of groups would be best to prevent group think from happening. But looking at it again encouraging a group norm of critical evaluation and dissent is both more reasonable and also it identifies and attempts to rectify the critical issue associated with groupthink so it's a better answer. Is my reasoning correct?

P/S question 45: Can someone tell me where these types of intelligence come from? like what theory is associated with analytical/creative/interpersonal/emotional intelligence? I know that gardner's theory includes interpersonal but I have never heard of any of the others before this question.

Thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[freak7]

For the first one I think their wording is bad. I think they mean that the mutation itself doesn't create or eliminate a stop codon at the place of mutation. Any single nucleotide addition would eliminate the stop codon of the original or would create an earlier stop codon.

 

[Spectar]

For the first one I think their wording is bad. I think they mean that the mutation itself doesn't create or eliminate a stop codon at the place of mutation. Any single nucleotide addition would eliminate the stop codon of the original or would create an earlier stop codon.

Ahh okay that one makes more sense. Thanks for that one

 

[Dirtybird]

The bio question is giving you a hypothetical situation, they are telling you specifically that there is no stop codon created by the frameshift mutation (even if it'd usually be likely) for the sake of this question. Basically saying that the frameshift causes ONLY missense mutations.

If you inserted a nucleotide in the middle of the open reading frame, all the codons on the left side of it (N-terminal) would be translated as usual while the sequence to the right of the added nucleotide (C-terminal) would give you a completely different set of amino acids.

For the source monitoring problem, somebody is asked to identify the famous names on the list. If there was source monitoring, they'd confuse whether the familiar names they see are actual celebrities or just names that they've been presented earlier. The most important thing about this is that they'd be LEAST likely to say that the new names that they are exposed to are "famous" names. I believe only one graph on the answer choices showed more "old" vs "new".

For the groupthink question, you need to rely a bit more on previous knowledge rather than the passage (although this isn't always the best strategy for passage based questions). Dissent and critical arguments are 2 things that fail to occur with groupthink. Also, you could reason that groupthink could still happen among a group of friends, even if it's less likely than with a group of strangers.

 

[ArmyArmyArmy]

For the insertion question, it still doesn't make sense based on the answer choices. The wording is bad, but I wouldn't worry about missing that one.

For the source monitoring error, I think MCAT guys got it wrong. Source monitoring should indicate that more of the previously presented names were lumped in with the actual famous people category (compared to the "new list"). There is not enough information in the graph for you to make the assumption regarding the "new list" height on the graph, except that it should be higher than the old list. Someone help if I am missing something as well.

Regarding the groupthink question, yes the study itself as described in the passage would recommend that all groups be comprised of friends. I debated selecting it as well because that's how the mcat passages usually work; only use the arguments you can justify with the passages. For this one though, i guess common sense just strongly overrides (for once).

Again, please anybody correct me if I'm missing something as well.

Also for anyone out there, i think the MCAT guys also chose wrong solutions on CARS questions 11, 12, 21, and 32. At least you know one fairly strong test-taker finds them ambiguous. It's not just you!

 

[DaAlienist]

Ahh okay that one makes more sense. Thanks for that one

Yeah #43 was terribly worded. Coupled with the outright mistake and error in PT 1, I cannot believe the AAMC gets away with this.

@Dirtybird If you inserted a nucleotide in the middle of the open reading frame, all the codons on the left side of it (N-terminal) would be translated as usual while the sequence to the right of the added nucleotide (C-terminal) would give you a completely different set of amino acids.

This U nderstand, thank you. The Q is worded so poorly but they did use the "most likely" BS they often do. That is why they will stand behind this Q as not being terrible. No matter the insertion, deletion, missense, nonsense, everything to the LEFT of any mutation will always be normal.


Overall the AAMC practice tests are abysmal. I would have expected better from the official test writers. The section bank is really good though, so at least we have that. How did they screw up the most important practice items they sell?

 

[Dirtybird]

For the source monitoring error, I think MCAT guys got it wrong. Source monitoring should indicate that more of the previously presented names were lumped in with the actual famous people category (compared to the "new list"). There is not enough information in the graph for you to make the assumption regarding the "new list" height on the graph, except that it should be higher than the old list. Someone help if I am missing something as well.

There is absolutely a correct answer choice, and it makes perfect sense. The height of the "new list" should be lowest. Both the new and old lists contain fictitious names. If you were asked to identify famous people from a list that combined names of actual celebrities with the fictitious names from both the new and old lists, the only names you would have NEVER seen before are the ones from the new list. You would be least likely think these names were of actual famous people. The other names, you HAVE seen before because they are actual celebrities, or because you were previously exposed to them in the "old list". Familiarity = must be famous right? With source monitoring, you wouldn't be able to distinguish between the two, but you'd certainly choose them over the "new list" names.
There is only one answer choice in which the "new list" names are chosen less frequently than the celebrities or "old list" names. All the other choices show "new list" names being chosen at a higher rate than the either the "old list" or celebrity names, which makes no sense.

 

[Loonj]

Hi so I also just took the fl 2 and i dont understand how I got this question wrong. I chose B and it marked me wrong, however the answer description under c says that my answer of B was correct so is this an error on the fl 2?

It was question 45 on the B/B section. It was asking about how many moles of ATP would be produced under aerobic cellular respirations if you started with 5 moles of glucose. So to answer that, I multiplied 2 moles of ATP produced (per glucose) by 5 moles of glucose which gave me 10 moles of ATP to which I multiplied by avogadros number to get 6 X 10^24.

 

[freak7]

Hi so I also just took the fl 2 and i dont understand how I got this question wrong. I chose B and it marked me wrong, however the answer description under c says that my answer of B was correct so is this an error on the fl 2?

It was question 45 on the B/B section. It was asking about how many moles of ATP would be produced under aerobic cellular respirations if you started with 5 moles of glucose. So to answer that, I multiplied 2 moles of ATP produced (per glucose) by 5 moles of glucose which gave me 10 moles of ATP to which I multiplied by avogadros number to get 6 X 10^24.

The answer isn't even present. The answer to the question is 10.

 

[Loonj]

exactly so like wth lmao? and the fl tests are supposed to be the same for everyone correct? did anyone else catch onto this or was it just me

 

[DaAlienist]

exactly so like wth lmao? and the fl tests are supposed to be the same for everyone correct? did anyone else catch onto this or was it just me

I know, how old is this test? Someone had to have caught it long before now, right? Unless the AAMC did some changes, and screwed up. But this has been weeks now, and still no fix? What a shtshow.

 

[DocDanc]

I had a question about #45 Chemical and Physical Foundations section of Practice Test 2 because I thought that the amount of A equals the amount of T and the amount of C equals the amount of G on OPPOSITE strands of DNA not on the same strand of DNA. This was what the answer says: "As guanine and cytosine base pair on opposite DNA strands they will occur in equal amounts within a specific DNA sequence." Can someone explain this?

 

[rabbott1971]

On the one about fictitious names and stuff, I got that right, perhaps out of luck, but my thinking was that the subject heard the old fictitious names twice, but the new fictitious names only once.

I'm glad to hear there is dispute over the open reading frame question, because I did not understand/agree with the explanation.

The groupthink question is pretty straightforward and I think you just over-thought it a little bit when you chose A.

 

[Squish miss]

On the one about fictitious names and stuff, I got that right, perhaps out of luck, but my thinking was that the subject heard the old fictitious names twice, but the new fictitious names only once.

I'm glad to hear there is dispute over the open reading frame question, because I did not understand/agree with the explanation.

The groupthink question is pretty straightforward and I think you just over-thought it a little bit when you chose A.

is the avoagdro question okay. and yea the one about the fictions names, i feel like you just use common sense;/ .i got it wrong. but i get the common sense how celebrities are more famous still don't get why the answer is scientifically correct