Self-study
P1
Leading questions—questions worded in such a way as to suggest a particular answer—can yield unreliable testimony either by design, as when a lawyer tries to trick a witness into affirming a particular version of the evidence of a case, or by accident, when a questioner unintentionally prejudices the witness's response. ███
Problem ·
Leading questions
Can produce unreliable testimony.
Solution ·
Judge can disallow leading questions in the courtroom
Problem ·
Leading questions outside the courtroom
A witness's beliefs can be affected by leading questions asked by lawyers, police, reporters, or others before the witness gets in the courtroom.
P2
██████ ███████ ████ █████████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ █████████ ██ █████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ████ ███ ██ █ ██████ █████████████ ██ ███ ████ ███████ ██████ ████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████ ████ ███ ███████ █████ ████ ██ ████████████ ████████ ████ ████ ███████ ██ ███████ ██████████ █████ ███████ ███████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██████ ███████ ██ ██████ ██████ ██ █████████████ █████ ██ █████ ██ ████ ████████ ██████████ █████████ ████████████ ████████ █████████ ████ ██ ██████ ██████████ ███ ████ █████████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███ ████████ ████████ ████ ███ ██████ ██████ █████ ██ ████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ████ █████████ ███████ ████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ██ ██ ████████ █████ ██ ██ ████ ██ █████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ██ █████ ██████ ███ ███ ████ ██ █ █████████████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ██ █████ ██████ ████ ██ █ ████████████ ██ ████ ███ █████████████ ████ ███
Details of problem ·
New "facts" that don't conflict with memories can become part of memories
If the new "facts" correspond with our memory, they'll be interpreted as reinforcing our memory. If the new "facts" involve a gap in our memory, we may use them to fill in the gap.
Example ·
"How fast was the car going when it passed the stop sign?"
The witness may not have seen a stop sign, but when asked this question, may falsely recall seeing one.
P3
███ ███████ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ ███ ███████ ███ ██████ ██ █ █████ ██ ██████████ ████████████ ███ ███ ███████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ █████████ ███████████ ████████ ████ ████████ █████████ █████ ██ ███ ██ ████ ██████ ██████ ████ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ █████████ █████████ ██████████ ███████ ███ ████ ███ ██ ██████ ███████████ ███ ██ ████████████ ██████████ ███████████ ████ ███ ████ ███████ ████████ ███
Details of problem ·
Farther removed from event, more tangential detail -> higher chance new "fact" blends with original memory
Significance of problem ·
Tangential details can be critical in the courtroom
Example: Suspect's shirt color or hairstyle might be tangential to witness of robbery. But these are critical to identifying the correct suspect. These kinds of details are exactly the kind susceptible to influence from leading questions.
Passage Style
Problem-analysis
Single position
25.
The second paragraph consists primarily ██ ████████ ████
a
corroborates and adds ██████ ██ █ █████ ████ ██ ███ █████ █████████
This best captures P2’s purpose. By describing research about how people process information suggested in a leading question, P2 supports
b
provides examples illustrating ███ ████████████ ██ █ ██████ █████████ ██ ███ █████ █████████
The author doesn’t apply a theory from P1. The studies described in P2 aren’t applications of the idea that leading questions outside a courtroom can affect courtroom testimony. They’re support for that idea. An application would involve an example of someone trying to put that idea into effect — perhaps a lawyer who intentionally asks leading questions in order to plant false memories in a witness. That’s not what we get in P2.
c
forms an argument ██ ███████ ██ █ ████████ ████ ██ ████ ██ ███ █████ █████████
The author doesn’t make any proposal in the last paragraph. Rather, she provides additional details about how our memories can be affected by leading questions outside the courtroom.
d
anticipates and provides ███████ ███ ███ █████████ ██ █ ██████ ███████ ██ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███ █████ █████████
P2 doesn’t present grounds for a rejection of a theory alluded to in the last paragraph. P2 doesn’t reject anything suggested in the last paragraph. The last paragraph provides additional details about how our memories can be affected by leading questions outside the courtroom.
e
explains how newly ████████ ████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ███████████ ████████ █████████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ █████████
There aren’t two theories mentioned in P2. There are two different effects of new data suggested in leading questions (reinforce or fill in gaps), but these aren’t two different theories. And the author doesn’t present evidence that favors just one of those effects.