PT154 S4 Q16 ExplanationResearchers investigating the accuracy

Answer choices, explained

1. A

   Unknown Comparison1% picked this

   Eyewitnesses are no more likely to accurately select a suspect from a lineup than are people who are given an accurate

   We don't have any information about how people perform when they're given an accurate verbal description of the suspect, so there's no way to compare that to a visual experience of the suspect.

   1%
2. B

   Trap12% picked this

   People tend to want to satisfy the stated expectations of those who ask

   Doesn't Explain Difference Out of Scope: stated expectation We were never told that the people in study received any stated expectation (i.e. the paragraph doesn't say that researchers stated, "Here is a lineup. We expect that you'll be able to identify which person is the criminal." Also, even if they had, this answer choice would apply to both groups the same way, so it doesn't explain the data very well. If all the research subjects wanted to appease the researchers and identify someone as the criminal, then both groups would have forced themselves to pick someone, even though the criminal wasn't there.

   12%
3. C

   Out of Scope: specifically directed8% picked this

   When specifically directed by a person of authority to say that something is among a group of things when it is

   Similar to (B), we were never told that the people in study received any specific directions to say, "The criminal is someone in this lineup." And if we were to just assume that both groups had been told this, then it wouldn't explain the 78% vs. 38% variation.

   8%
4. D

   Out of Scope: recognize similarities4% picked this

   People fail to recognize the physical similarities among a group of people unless they are given information in

   Did anything in this paragraph talk about subjects "failing to recognize similarities among a group of people"? Just because many of them wrongly picked a suspect as the criminal doesn't mean they failed to see the physical similarities among the people in the lineup.

   4%
5. E

   Correct75% picked this

   People are less likely to think they see something that is not actually present the less they

   Why this is right

   This answer reinforces the Causal Difference-Maker. The people who were told, "The criminal might not actually be anyone in this lineup" presumably started lowering their expectations that the "the criminal will be in this lineup", and this led to less misidentification of the criminal (38% vs. 78%). The other group, who wasn't told anything, probably had the default assumption when shown a lineup of suspects that the criminal would be someone in that group. Since the group who was warned went in with more skepticism, they didn't force themselves to pick a criminal when no one matched their memory.

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

   75%