#help I chose B because of this part of the paragraph: "However, it may therefore be effective only when the negative information can be framed positively. Jurors, who often initially have little information about a case, are usually eager to solidify their position regarding the case. They can therefore be expected to use the early positive framing to guide their subsequent analysis of the trial information. But this also suggests limitations on the use of the technique: when information is very damaging, stealing thunder may create an early negative impression that forms a cognitive framework for jurors, who then filter subsequent information through this schema". Since it mentioned jurors trying to form their opinions early on, I made the jump to opening statements since they happen early on. I also think the use of the word "only" before this explanation led me to jump to skepticism when this doesn't occur early on, and the conversation going into the limitations when this doesn't happen. Ultimately, I can see why B is wrong and why D is correct, but is there a specific tactic I can use to avoid this confusion in the future? Thank you!
I get this is implied, but since it's the author attitude, and one perspective, is it realistic that this answer should fall along the lines of the MP? MP being that there's support for stealing thunder, despite the slight skepticism in the final paragraph. Is there correlation between author attitude & main point in single position passages?
@nelleluvsyou How is it now two months later? Have you gotten better at them? I feel a main thing towards my learning is fatigue and the RC causes this mighty fast with these dense and long reads!
I got this one correctly. Idk if it is just this passage specifically, but the correct answer choices seem to be leaning more towards implied spectrum. Compared to the debate/mutli-perspective being on the proveable side.
This one took me a while I was able to easily cross out E & C then A. I was left with B and D and ended up choosing D from POE. I couldn’t find support where the author suggest to use it in different parts of the trial such as the opening statement.
this was a hard one for me I chose e during my timed part but, I had to go back and realized that the author was approved despite being a little timid. I thought this was a hard one
my strategy is to read the passage passionately/dramatically in my head. i do better on the attitude questions when i exaggerate the tone. i didn't find this passage to be particularly neutral since the author explicitly supports the practice and only mentions a minor drawback, which helped me eliminate the (incorrect) answer choices that mentioned concern/skepticism
that's kinda genius because I determined the author was in mild favor because they kept referencing all the benefits and really the didnt give a counter point.
#help i eliminated D because the author discusses instances where this technique would not be effective, and it appeared D ignored this exception to the rule. I understand why the other answers are incorrect but i struggle to understand why D is correct when it appears to be leaving out a portion of the authors stance towards stealing thunder. does this simply boil down to it being a "most accurately" question, thus the answer doesn't need to be 100%, just closer to accurate than all the other options? thanks!
Note that D isn't saying that the technique is always effective. It's just saying the author is "approving of its use" -- that's a general claim about the author's attitude. We can acknowledge the author appears to approve of its use. This doesn't mean the author believes it's effective in all cases.
It's like the statement, "I approve of children using smartphones." Does that mean I think every single child in the world should be allowed to use a smartphone, no matter his or her individual circumstances? Not necessarily.
#help I was wary about selecting D on the grounds that we already established there were no hard empirical experiments carried out on the subject. Is this answer correct because the studies that represented real trial situations count as the "experimental evidence?" I noticed that the passage said these studies counted as "experimental findings."
Careful -- there have been no empirical experiments designed to explore the effectiveness of "stealing thunder" in actual trial. But there are experiments from which we might derive support for the effectiveness of stealing thunder -- the simulated trial experiments and the psychological research.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Sorry, you need a subscription for that.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
20 comments
#help I chose B because of this part of the paragraph: "However, it may therefore be effective only when the negative information can be framed positively. Jurors, who often initially have little information about a case, are usually eager to solidify their position regarding the case. They can therefore be expected to use the early positive framing to guide their subsequent analysis of the trial information. But this also suggests limitations on the use of the technique: when information is very damaging, stealing thunder may create an early negative impression that forms a cognitive framework for jurors, who then filter subsequent information through this schema". Since it mentioned jurors trying to form their opinions early on, I made the jump to opening statements since they happen early on. I also think the use of the word "only" before this explanation led me to jump to skepticism when this doesn't occur early on, and the conversation going into the limitations when this doesn't happen. Ultimately, I can see why B is wrong and why D is correct, but is there a specific tactic I can use to avoid this confusion in the future? Thank you!
I get this is implied, but since it's the author attitude, and one perspective, is it realistic that this answer should fall along the lines of the MP? MP being that there's support for stealing thunder, despite the slight skepticism in the final paragraph. Is there correlation between author attitude & main point in single position passages?
1/4 right less goooooooooo
@nelleluvsyou How is it now two months later? Have you gotten better at them? I feel a main thing towards my learning is fatigue and the RC causes this mighty fast with these dense and long reads!
got this correct after blind review
the word psychologically was a no brainer for me
I got this one correctly. Idk if it is just this passage specifically, but the correct answer choices seem to be leaning more towards implied spectrum. Compared to the debate/mutli-perspective being on the proveable side.
CMON MAN....... THAT'S TO EASY.
This one took me a while I was able to easily cross out E & C then A. I was left with B and D and ended up choosing D from POE. I couldn’t find support where the author suggest to use it in different parts of the trial such as the opening statement.
this was a hard one for me I chose e during my timed part but, I had to go back and realized that the author was approved despite being a little timid. I thought this was a hard one
Got it right but 0:01 slower than target.
Actually pissed me right off.
How can I be able to bring out the authors thoughts when the writing seems so nuetral?
my strategy is to read the passage passionately/dramatically in my head. i do better on the attitude questions when i exaggerate the tone. i didn't find this passage to be particularly neutral since the author explicitly supports the practice and only mentions a minor drawback, which helped me eliminate the (incorrect) answer choices that mentioned concern/skepticism
that's kinda genius because I determined the author was in mild favor because they kept referencing all the benefits and really the didnt give a counter point.
I was in between B and D, choose B ugh
note to self: make sure you actually click the answer choice before submitting
#help i eliminated D because the author discusses instances where this technique would not be effective, and it appeared D ignored this exception to the rule. I understand why the other answers are incorrect but i struggle to understand why D is correct when it appears to be leaving out a portion of the authors stance towards stealing thunder. does this simply boil down to it being a "most accurately" question, thus the answer doesn't need to be 100%, just closer to accurate than all the other options? thanks!
Note that D isn't saying that the technique is always effective. It's just saying the author is "approving of its use" -- that's a general claim about the author's attitude. We can acknowledge the author appears to approve of its use. This doesn't mean the author believes it's effective in all cases.
It's like the statement, "I approve of children using smartphones." Does that mean I think every single child in the world should be allowed to use a smartphone, no matter his or her individual circumstances? Not necessarily.
#help I was wary about selecting D on the grounds that we already established there were no hard empirical experiments carried out on the subject. Is this answer correct because the studies that represented real trial situations count as the "experimental evidence?" I noticed that the passage said these studies counted as "experimental findings."
Careful -- there have been no empirical experiments designed to explore the effectiveness of "stealing thunder" in actual trial. But there are experiments from which we might derive support for the effectiveness of stealing thunder -- the simulated trial experiments and the psychological research.