Command of Evidence

Hard Reading and Writing · Information and Ideas · Command of Evidence · MCQ

Linguist Deborah Tannen has cautioned against framing contentious issues in terms of two highly competitive perspectives, such as pro versus con. According to Tannen, this debate-driven approach can strip issues of their complexity and, when used in front of an audience, can be less informative than the presentation of multiple perspectives in a noncompetitive format. To test Tannen’s hypothesis, students conducted a study in which they showed participants one of three different versions of local news commentary about the same issue. Each version featured a debate between two commentators with opposing views, a panel of three commentators with various views, or a single commentator.

Which finding from the students’ study, if true, would most strongly support Tannen’s hypothesis?

A
On average, participants perceived commentators in the debate as more knowledgeable about the issue than commentators in the panel.
B
On average, participants perceived commentators in the panel as more knowledgeable about the issue than the single commentator.
C
On average, participants who watched the panel correctly answered more questions about the issue than those who watched the debate or the single commentator did.
D
On average, participants who watched the single commentator correctly answered more questions about the issue than those who watched the debate did.

Correct answer: C

Explanation

Choice C is the best answer because it presents the finding that, if true, would most strongly support Tannen’s hypothesis. According to the text, Tannen’s hypothesis is that multiple perspectives presented in a noncompetitive format is more informative than a debate between opposing viewpoints is. If participants who saw a panel of three commentators with various views about an issue answered more questions about the issue correctly than did participants who saw a debate, that would support Tannen’s hypothesis since it would show that participants who heard multiple varied perspectives were better informed than were participants who heard a debate between opposing viewpoints.

Choice A is incorrect because finding that participants perceived commentators in the debate as more knowledgeable than commentators in the panel is irrelevant to Tannen’s hypothesis, which is that presenting multiple perspectives on an issue is more informative to the audience than presenting opposing views of the issue is. Participants’ perception of how knowledgeable panelists are has no bearing on how much participants learn from the panelists. Choice B is incorrect because finding that participants perceived commentators in the panel as more knowledgeable than a single commentator is irrelevant to Tannen’s hypothesis, which is that presenting multiple perspectives on an issue is more informative to the audience than presenting opposing views of the issue is. Participants’ perception of how knowledgeable panelists are has no bearing on how much participants learn from the panelists, and Tannen’s hypothesis says nothing about how informative single commentators are. Choice D is incorrect because finding that participants who watched a single commentator answered more questions correctly than participants who watched the debate did wouldn’t be relevant to Tannen’s hypothesis, which is that hearing multiple varying perspectives is more informative than hearing a debate. Tannen’s hypothesis says nothing about how informative single commentators are.

Source: SAT practice questions © College Board, from the official SAT Suite Question Bank. Retrieved via the community dump at github.com/mdn522/sat-question-bank. View the official question bank →

SAT® and PSAT/NMSQT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, does not sponsor, and does not endorse this project.

id cb_question_bank:1745307a-9f51-42b2-bf1f-dd3320ee9e88 · question 71904085 · JSON