#20 - Global Reference, Main Point

[Henry Z]

I chose (D) over (B), because I thought the main point of the passage is author's (slight) counterargument to judges disallowing leading questions from the courtroom ("But their exclusion from the courtroom by no means eliminates the remote effects of earlier leading questions on eyewitness testimony.") The author doesn't oppose it, but says it's not as effective as the judges might've thought. I think (B) is right in the main idea, but misses the main purpose, that is to (again, slightly) criticize, instead of just being informative.

Some explanations say that (D) is wrong because of "virtually impossible", but the passage says the leading questions can be "unintentional," and the effects on the witness can be very subconscious, if so, they're largely undetectable on both sides. I think it's safe to say it's "virtually impossible to prevent them from being used elsewhere, to the detriment of many cases."

[katehos]

Hi Henry!

In order to help answer your question, I think it is useful to start with the overall structure of the passage. In the first paragraph, we are introduced to the idea of leading questions and how they impact the memory of witnesses. The second paragraph then turns to recent studies that confirm the impact of leading questions on memory and the third paragraph further explains how this impact can have crucial consequences in the courtroom. This overall structure makes it easier to understand the informative, rather then persuasive, nature of this passage.

Turning more specifically to answer choice (D), it may be worth reconsidering whether or not the author is actually criticizing a judge's decision to exclude leading questions. The author does not assert that judge's should not do this, nor do they say judge's are under some false impression that disallowing leading questions in the courtroom entirely solves the issue. On a similar note, the passage does not say that it is "virtually impossible" (which is very strong language that requires textual support) to prevent them from being used elsewhere. Even if it makes logical sense that it may be difficult to eliminate the use of leading questions because they can be unintentional, make sure to ask yourself what the author thinks, not what you think. All the author says is that judges can disallow these questions but their effects can still be present elsewhere, with no mention of whether or not earlier introduction of leading questions can be prevented. The author then proceeds to spend the bulk of the passage discussing how exactly leading questions can occur and impact testimony.

All of this fits much more in line with (B), which states the main point as "because of the nature of human memory and storage retrieval, the courtroom testimony of eyewitnesses can contain crucial inaccuracies due to leading questions asked prior to the courtroom appearance." This answer choice touches on each of the key parts of the passage: the idea of leading questions, the way in which memories are processed and stored, and how these leading questions, by extension, impact courtroom testimony.

I hope this helps
Kate

[altyson99]

Hi,

I'm a bit confused by the explanation here as I was also between B and D. I see why B is correct, but I don't quite see why C is incorrect. In the first paragraph the author says "For this reason, a judge can disallow questions... But their exclusion from the courtroom by no means eliminates the remote effects..." Answer choice D says "Although judges can disallow leading questions... it is virtually impossible to prevent them from being used elsewhere..."

I'm specifically confused on the explanation stating that we should consider if the author is criticizing the judge's decision and whether the author is instructing the judge on what they should and should not do. No judgement language is brought up in the stimulus, so I'm not sure how that helps to rule this choice out. Could you please shed some light.

Thank you.

[Adam Tyson]

The discussion about whether the author is criticizing judges was in response to the earlier question in this thread, altyson99.

One problem with answer D, as pointed out by Kate, is that "virtually impossible" is very strong language. Just like in Logical Reasoning, we cannot select such a strong claim unless the passage provides strong support for it. I'll add that the answer continues to be too strong in claiming that this is detrimental to "many" cases. The author used words like "may" and "might," and they talk about how leading questions increase the risk of tainting the memory and testimony of a witness. This soft language is much better reflected in answer B.

Also, we are supposed to be identifying the overall Main Point of the passage. Was this passage about being unable to prevent leading questions prior to the witness testifying in the courtroom, or was it about the possible effects of those leading questions? Answer D places too much emphasis on the former, when the passage is primarily about the latter.

In your question, you mentioned answer C, but I am assuming that was a typo. The passage is not about anyone being surprised.