Two hundred randomly selected subjects

Answer choices

1. A

   Goes Against Second Data Point5% picked this

   Experiencing a sense of a strange presence in a room in some way causes subjects to feel as

   This answer is somewhat tempting on a first pass. It feels like a reasonable attempt to explain the mismatch between the two study results. Again, there's no way that being "A and B" can be more common than being "A", because everyone who is "A and B" is by definition "A". There's no way that being a lawyer and a softball player can be more common than being a lawyer, because everyone who is a lawyer and a softball player is by definition a lawyer. So if waking up feeling paralyzed only occurs in 14% of the population, then it's funky to be hearing that 40% of people say they've awoken to feel paralyzed and sensing a strange presence. One possible way to explain that would be to say, "they really only awoke to feel the strange presence, but then the strange presence made them feel paralyzed". However, if 40% of people wake up to feel a strange presence (and if feeling a strange presence makes one feel seemingly paralyzed), then 40% of people would say "Yeah, I can remember waking up and feeling seemingly paralyzed". But when people were asked strictly about that phenomenon, only 14% said they had experienced it. So this answer doesn't work as an "explanation" that would help us reconcile the two results.

   5%
2. B

   Out of Scope8% picked this

   The number of subjects who had awakened with a sense of a strange presence in the room was greater in the first

   Out of Scope: control group's other response We only know what % of the control group has awoken to feel seemingly paralyzed. We have no idea what % of the control group has awoken to feel a strange presence in the room (we don't even know if they were ever asked that question), so we have no basis for comparing the number of subjects in each group who have experienced 'strange presence'.

   8%
3. C

   Too Strong: never One-Claim Support8% picked this

   If the reports of the first group of subjects were accurate, approximately 60 percent of them had never awakened with a sense of

   We know that 60% of the first group had never awakened to feel both seemingly paralyzed and a strange presence. 40% of people in that group have awakened to feel both. It's possible that another 15% of those people have awakened to feel a strange presence (but not seemingly paralyzed). That would mean that 55% of people in the first group has awakened to feel a strange presence, and only 45% of people in that group have never awakened with to sense a strange presence. It should unnerve us that supporting this answer would only involve looking at the first sentence of the paragraph. It is extremely rare for the correct answer on Must Be True or Most Supported to only pull support from one claim.

   8%
4. D

   Too Strong: inconsistent3% picked this

   At least some of the randomly selected subjects of the study

   This is saying that some of the subjects contradicted themselves in what they reported ("inconsistent" claims are contradictory claims). But we have no reason to think anyone contradicted themselves. There are two different groups of people. The responses from one group might clash with the responses of the other group, but that doesn't mean that any individual subject contradicted themselves.

   3%
5. E

   Correct76% picked this

   The tendency of subjects to report a recollection of an event can sometimes be increased by suggesting circumstances

   Why this is right

   This represents a safer version of (A). It has incredibly weak language ("sometimes"), and it allows us to reconcile the disparate findings. It seems like waking up to feel paralyzed only happens to about 14% of people. So why did 40% in group A say they remembered waking up, seemingly paralyzed, with a sense of a strange presence in the room? We can speculate reasonably that they focused on the part of the question they did remember (40% remembered waking to sense a strange presence) and then agreed to the question, even though they might not have remembered feeling seemingly paralyzed. The description was close-enough to something they remembered that they said they remembered that experience, but in reality they didn't "remember" being paralyzed, they just convinced themselves such a thing had happened because they DID remember the accompanying circumstance of sensing a strange presence.

   Skill tested: Most Supported · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   76%