#24 - Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[reop6780]

#24)

What is the difference between the answer C and D?
I chose D because of the lines of 54---.
Regardless of the fact that inferential errors are known to judges, they employ only a limited and primitive concept of jury inferential error.



I have never struggled this much with RC... I feel like I should start studying all over again how to attack RC...

[David Boyle]

#24)

What is the difference between the answer C and D?
I chose D because of the lines of 54---.
Regardless of the fact that inferential errors are known to judges, they employ only a limited and primitive concept of jury inferential error.



I have never struggled this much with RC... I feel like I should start studying all over again how to attack RC...

Hello,

Answer D, "pessimistic about their willingness to make significant changes in trial procedure", is unwarranted, since it insults judges by saying they're unwilling to do the right thing. That's different from C, which seems to say they **don't always know** what the right thing is to do.
Also, "trial procedure" may not be the same as taking psychological research into account.

David

[reop6780]

Thank you for the clarification !

[Roadto170]

For this question type, author's attitude or perspective, I often struggle to see the problem the same way that the testmakers do.

For example, in question #24, the stem asks about the author's attitude towards the majority of judges. Within the stimulus, I looked to the fourth paragraph for guidance regarding this problem. In the fourth paragraph, the stimulus (From the author's perspective) states that "Nonetheless, most judges now employ only a limited and primitive concept of jury inferential error".

From this, I looked to 'tone' words from the author to get a sense of the statement that they might agree with. The words 'limited' and 'primative' certainly are not kind here. I would conceed that this is a very critical statement, as answer choice C starts with. However, the rest of answer choice C discusses judges failure to take research into account. In contrast, answer choice A discusses "the instruction of juries" (which is the main point in paragraph four).

Consequently, I am little confused how C would better describe his attitude as opposed to A. Again, critical would be an apt description, however there is nothing in the stimulus that shows this type of language in connection with judges and research.

Thanks in advance!

[Adam Tyson]

You're doing exactly the right thing by doing your research in the text, Roadto170, but you need to broaden the scope of that research to take into account more of the context. Look to the next portion of that sentence, where the author says this:

limited because it fails to recognize the potential for error outside certain traditional situations, primitive because it ignores the research and conclusions of psychologists in favor of notions about human cognition held by lawyers. (emphasis added)

That is direct, explicit, textual evidence in favor of answer C!

Meanwhile, there is no evidence to support answer A. It's true that "one of a presiding judge's duties is to minimize
jury inferential error through explanation and clarification," but the author never says or even implies that judges are inconsistent in those explanations. The problem is that the explanations fail to take into account the valuable psychological research that the author thinks would help.