General-Types of Questions on Exam vs. Review

[sophia.lin12345]

Very general question: are the types of problems I see on the OG's and Manhattan Review (topics covered and wording of each question) generally the types of problems I'll run into on the exam, so there shouldn't be anything out of left field?

IR: Not sure if this is appropriate to ask, so let me know and I'll delete the question: Reading graphs-what are the chances of coming across a graph that's never showed up in a Manhattan GMAT review?

[StaceyKoprince]

Generally, yes, but there could always be something somewhat out of left field. Every test will contain experimental questions, and you may very well get something that they're testing but haven't really done much before.

Now, they're not suddenly going to give you calculus or something like that. :) But they could toss something at you that's unexpected. I remember a Geo question one time that was unlike anything I'd ever seen before (and I've seen it all!).

That's when you just say, "Oh, look, this is probably an experimental." Try it for 30 seconds or so but, if it's crazy, guess and move on.

For IR, they have not limited the kinds of graphs they can use - anything is game. Make sure you look through the available official IR graph questions and you'll see what kind of variety has been published so far. Some of them aren't even what I would really call graphs - they're just diagrams that are unique to that problem.

The highest frequency = more normal / expected graphs, but again, you could see anything. (And, again, they're not going to give you some super-advanced thing that you'd need a Masters in stats to read.)