#20 - Specific Reference, Must Be True, Purpose

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[8385729]

I chose answer choice D here, can you please explain why this answer is wrong and C is correct?

[Adam Tyson]

The passage is primarily concerned with the problems associated with testimony obtained from jailhouse informants and co-conspirators, 8. So why did the author bring up confessions directly from the accused? To show us another, similar situation where juries might be influenced by psychological factors to trust evidence that might be untrustworthy. It's to draw an analogy that helps us better understand the problems with weighing testimony from those other parties who may have been coerced or have hidden motives. That's what answer C is about - the author brought up problems with weighing the truthfulness of confessions to further explain the problems with weighing the truthfulness of testimony by other criminals.

Answer D is about the relevance of how juries make decisions. It's a pretty confusing answer, but it's ultimately kind of backwards, in addition to not being the point of that paragraph. Is the author questioning (challenging, refuting) the relevance of how juries make decisions and how that might affect the way courts rely on cooperating witnesses? No, he's saying that their processes are VERY relevant to that issue! We have to be aware of the psychological factors that influence juries, so that they don't give undue weight to that type of evidence. He's not questioning the relevance (saying it's probably not relevant), but rather saying that it is actually very important.

But that's not why confession testimony is brought up. That wasn't about the relevance of how juries make decision, but was about comparing the problems with one type of testimony to the problems with another type.

[cargostud]

This one was tricky. In the fourth paragraph I spotted "Defendant's Behavior" and "Cooperating Witness's Behavior." I mistakenly chose (E) because it seemed like there was a contrasting of the two.

However, (C) is a better choice. The conclusion in paragraph 4 may not be easy to pick out, but in the end its about jurors' failing to realize the effect that incentives have on cooperating witness's.

So the results of the research and the effect of incentives on defendant's behavior and the corresponding juror's giving undo weight to confessions, is used to justify the conclusion about cooperating witness's. (C) is the correct answer.

[KelseyWoods]

That's correct, cargostud!

A general tip for Specific Reference--Purpose questions like this one: Oftentimes, even though the question is referring you to a specific sentence or phrase, identifying the purpose of that statement requires identifying the purpose of the paragraph, as most statements are in support of the main idea of that particular paragraph. As you read a passage, pause after each paragraph to think about what the main idea/purpose of that paragraph is. This will help you track the structure of the passage as you read which will help you with both Global questions like Main Point, as well as Specific--Reference--Purpose questions like this one.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[ashpine17]

So I suck at these purpose type questions. After reading Paragraph 4, how am I supposed to know why the author brought up the research? I thought it was just another point supporting the notion that the court's and jury's reliance on witness testimony has problems.

[ashpine17]

Does the first sentence of the 4th paragraph support the second statement in the same paragraph? Is that what the correct answer choice is referring to? "This research indicates that jurors give undue weight..."

[Robert Carroll]

ashpine,

It's fundamental to your understanding of the passage that you think about why the author made the choices they made in writing the passage. Nothing in the passage is thrown in arbitrarily. There is a discernible reason behind what the author has done. You have to understand that when you read the passage, and if you don't, make sense of it. Go back and reread if necessary. When you get to this question, go back to the relevant part, prephrase the purpose, and only then move on to the answers.

It seems like you were on the right track in your first post. The author wants to make a point that cooperating witness testimony is problematic. But this paragraph is about confessions - not exactly the same thing. So the author is using an adjacent situation to try to prove a point about the target situation - cooperating witness testimony. That's good as a prephrase!

The answer choice is referring to the entire point of the fourth paragraph, because the point of mentioning confession testimony is that analogy to cooperating witness testimony.

Robert Carroll

[Henry Z]

Why is (A) wrong?

(A) says the purpose is to "reveal a potential problem for the author’s analysis", which I think matches the fourth paragraph ("reveal further problems with bartered testimony"), and the fifth paragragh is the author's analysis of the problem ("A common psychological phenomenon may account for ...").

[Adam Tyson]

It's because the author isn't analyzing the problems associated with confession testimony, Henry Z. They are just using research about confession testimony in order to draw a comparison to bartered testimony, which is what the author is actually analyzing. It's "we know this is true of confession testimony, which helps support my claim about this other testimony that is my subject matter."