PrepTest 156, Section 4, Question 8
Actors generally learn their lines by focusing on(49 more words not shown)
Each of the following, if(10 more words not shown)
- ATest subjects are(20 more words not shown)
- BThe actors who(22 more words not shown)
- CActors are more(22 more words not shown)
- DPeople who try(30 more words not shown)
- EPeople with no(23 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
I can see why understanding a character might help an actor remember the lines. The words would belong to a situation and a purpose, instead of being an isolated string to repeat. Knowing what the character wants, feeling the emotion, and moving through the scene could all give the actor something to connect the words to.
Still, the fact that actors commonly learn this way doesn't establish that it works better than rote memorization. People can keep using an inefficient method. I'd like a comparison: give people the same material, have some focus on meaning and context while others memorize by repetition, and see who remembers more.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for the exception among supporting facts. Four choices should give us a reason to believe emotion, action, or context helps memory. They don't each have to test the entire acting method. One choice will fail to support that method's advantage over rote memorization.
Working the answers
- A
Knowing what a shopping-list item will be used for adds context. If you're cooking a particular meal, remembering that meal could help you remember its ingredients. Better recall with that information supports the idea that connecting material to a purpose helps memory, even though the example concerns shopping rather than acting.
- BCorrect
This concerns how much time the actors spend learning, not how they spend that time. They might spend those hours repeating words, studying the character, or using some combination. Better performance after more time doesn't distinguish the two approaches we're comparing. We shouldn't assume that more time means more rote memorization, either; B simply leaves the method unresolved.
- C
The movement gives us a direct comparison for the action part of the claim. Actors remember lines better when they learn them with an appropriate motion than when they learn them without one. That supports the idea that physically doing something connected to the words can help memory.
- D
Imagining someone who needs the information gives the material a context and a communicative purpose. This answer also makes the comparison we wanted: those people retain more than people using rote memorization. It supports the advantage of giving the words meaning within a situation.
- E
Understanding the whole play supplies the context surrounding a line. If even people without acting experience remember and deliver lines better after gaining that understanding, we have evidence that context contributes to memory. Professional acting experience isn't required for that connection to help.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.