Aniko

Findings that support or weaken a claim

Lesson progressPractice problems 0/8
Difficulty
Advanced
Estimated time
35 minutes

What you’ll learn

  1. Recognize a finding question and find the claim it tests.
  2. Put the claim in a few words (the cause, the effect and the group), and cross out findings that only share its topic.
  3. Check that a finding compares the same groups the claim compares.
  4. Split a claim into its links and keep only a finding that shows every one.
  5. Spot what weakens a claim: the cause without the effect, the effect without the cause, or another cause.
  6. Support a claim that rejects a cause by ruling that cause out.

Prerequisites

You’re ready. No earlier lesson is needed.

Why this matters on the SAT

The question asks what would back up the claim

A finding question describes a study or an argument, states a claim, and asks: Which finding, if true, would most directly support the claim? About one in six asks what would weaken it instead. About two Command of Evidence questions in five are finding questions, most of them about science.

The findings don't have to be real: if true tells you to accept each one and ask what it would show. The question is which finding shows exactly what the claim says.

SAT example

Ultramarine, a vivid blue pigment, was historically produced by grinding lapis lazuli, a mineral found in only a few regions of the world. In 2024, archaeologists reported that microscopic analysis of blue-painted ceramic fragments from a ninth-century inland settlement revealed particles consistent with ultramarine.

Because the settlement lay far from any known lapis lazuli sources, the researchers hypothesized that the community participated in long-distance trade networks that could supply rare materials.

Which finding, if true, would most directly support the researchers’ hypothesis?

  1. A

    Geochemical tests show the pigment’s trace-element pattern matches lapis lazuli from a distant mining region, and surveys indicate no comparable mineral deposits exist near the settlement.

  2. B

    Records from neighboring towns describe local potters using several kinds of blue pigments, and the ceramic fragments’ designs resemble other objects made in the same region.

  3. C

    The ceramic fragments with blue paint were recovered from a large building that likely hosted public ceremonies, suggesting the pigment was reserved for special occasions.

  4. D

    Several travel accounts from the period mention merchants passing through the broader area, but the accounts do not specify what goods those merchants carried.

Solution to the example

Claim: the settlement got its blue pigment, made from a stone found only far away, by long-distance trade.

Predict: a finding that the blue came from far away, and couldn't have come from nearby.

Cross out: B points to local potters and local designs, so it suggests the blue was made nearby. C says where the pots were used, not where the blue came from.

Check: A traces the pigment to a distant mining region and finds no comparable mineral deposits nearby, so the answer is A.

D tempts most: it mentions merchants, but nothing ties them to the pigment.

Put the claim in a few words: cause, effect and group

Finding questions take one routine:

  1. Put the claim in a few words: the cause, the effect and the group it's about.
  2. Split a claim with two or three parts, and number them.
  3. Predict the finding: what would show every part. To weaken, what would pull the cause and the effect apart.
  4. Cross out findings that miss a part: the wrong effect, the wrong group, the wrong direction, or only the topic.
  5. Check the last choice against every part.

Step 1 does most of the work. A claim usually says that one thing causes or changes another for some group.

When a claim isn't about a cause, such as where something came from or when it began, put its parts in a few words instead: what, where or when. And when a question asks which finding would best explain an observation, treat the observation as the effect and look for its cause.

In this short text of our own, the claim is the librarian's:

The school library

A school library moved its graphic novels from a back room to a shelf by the front door. The librarian thinks the new spot will get students checking out more graphic novels.

Note: Cause
the shelf by the front door
Note: Effect
more graphic novels checked out
Note: Group
this library's students

A finding supports the claim only when it shows that effect, for that group, going the claim's way. Here are five findings; only one does:

Correct: Supports
After the move, students checked out twice as many graphic novels as before.
Wrong: Wrong effect
After the move, more students visited the library at lunch.
Wrong: Wrong direction
After the move, students checked out fewer graphic novels.
Wrong: Wrong group
After the move, teachers checked out more graphic novels.
Wrong: Only the topic
Graphic novels are the library's most expensive books to replace.

Every wrong one stays on the topic, libraries and graphic novels, and misses a part. More visitors aren't more checkouts, fewer checkouts are the opposite, and teachers aren't students. A finding can share the claim's topic and still show nothing about it. On the SAT, the most tempting wrong finding usually fails in one of three ways: it runs the wrong way, it measures a neighboring effect, or it only shares the topic.

Check your understanding:

Cause, effect and group? A coach thinks the team’s new warm-up will mean its players pull fewer muscles this season.

In this question, the claim is underlined. Put it in a few words (cause, effect and group), then look for the finding that shows all three.

Practice problems

Seagrass in strong currents

Practice problem

Researchers restoring damaged seagrass meadows often transplant shoots at evenly spaced intervals. Marine ecologist Lina Torres instead proposed planting shoots in small clusters, reasoning that neighboring plants could slow the movement of water and help one another remain rooted. Torres’s clustered planting method appears to improve young seagrass survival specifically at sites exposed to strong currents.

Which finding, if true, would most strongly support the underlined claim?

Answer choices

When a claim compares, the finding must compare the same groups

Most finding questions describe a study, and a study's claim usually compares: one group or condition against another. When a claim says more than, ask: more than whom? A supporting finding compares the same groups, on the claim's effect, with the claim's winner ahead.

Here's the library text, now set up as a comparison:

The school library: a comparison

A school library put half its graphic novels on a shelf by the front door and left the rest in the back room. The librarian thinks books on the front shelf get checked out more often than books in the back room.

Note: Compares
the front shelf and the back room
Note: Effect
how often books are checked out
Note: Ahead
the front shelf
Correct: Supports
Over a month, books on the front shelf were checked out twice as often as books in the back room.
Wrong: One side only
Books on the front shelf were checked out 40 times last month.
Wrong: Wrong comparison
Books on the front shelf were checked out more often this month than last month.
Wrong: Wrong direction
Books in the back room were checked out more often than books on the front shelf.

Forty checkouts sounds like a lot, but without the back room's number it shows nothing. This month against last month compares two times, not two places. When the claim names three groups, the one it puts ahead has to beat both of the others.

Check your understanding:

Does this finding support the claim? Claim: tomatoes grown in clay pots ripen sooner than tomatoes grown in plastic pots. Finding: tomatoes in clay pots ripened in about 60 days.

In this question, the hypothesis compares three ways of watching a program. Put it in a few words, then look for the finding that puts one way ahead of both others.

Practice problems

Subtitles and new words

Practice problem

A media studies team investigated whether subtitles can help viewers learn new vocabulary in a second language. The researchers argued that when subtitles are in the same language as the audio, viewers must actively connect spoken words to their written forms, which should increase attention to unfamiliar terms. They therefore hypothesized that viewers who watch a program with subtitles in the audio language will learn more new vocabulary than viewers who watch the same program with no subtitles or with subtitles in their native language.

Which finding, if true, would most directly support the researchers’ hypothesis?

Answer choices

To weaken a claim, pull the cause and the effect apart

A weaken question, which may say challenge or undermine, runs the same routine. Put the claim in a few words, then look for a finding that pulls the cause and the effect apart. It does that in one of three ways:

A weakening finding showsFor the first library claim
the cause without the effectThe library moved its graphic novels to the front once before, and checkouts didn't change.
the effect without the causeThe month of the move, every kind of book was checked out more, even books that never moved.
another causeThe week of the move, a popular graphic novel series became a hit movie.

Each one leaves the move without credit for any rise: a move that changed nothing before, a rise in books that never moved, or a better reason for the rise. A finding that only shares the topic, graphic novels cost more than other books, does nothing either way.

In a weaken question, a common trap is a finding that supports the claim. It's on the topic, and it's the kind of finding most questions ask for, so check which way each finding pushes before you keep it.

Check your understanding:

A café owner thinks her new sign brought in more customers. Which finding weakens that? (1) Customers say they like the sign. (2) The café got busier the week before the sign went up.

In this question, the underlined assumption names a cause (pausing and replaying) and an effect (higher scores). Put it in a few words, then look for a finding with the cause but not the effect.

Practice problems

Recorded lectures

Practice problem

In recent years, many universities have begun recording large lecture courses and allowing students to watch the recordings instead of attending in person. Some education researchers have assumed that because recorded lectures can be paused and replayed, students who rely on recordings will learn the material more effectively and therefore score higher on exams than students who attend live lectures. To test this assumption, a research team compared exam performance in sections of the same introductory course that differed only in whether students primarily attended live lectures or primarily used lecture recordings.

Which finding from the team’s comparison, if true, would most directly challenge the assumption in the underlined sentence?

Answer choices

Two more cases

A claim with only, all or never in it is weakened by one case that breaks it:

Note: Claim
only students checked out graphic novels this term
Note: Breaks it
one teacher checked one out

And the idea of another cause runs both ways: when a claim names one cause rather than another, a finding that rules out the other cause supports it.

Note: Claim
the move, rather than the hit movie, raised checkouts
Note: Supports it
graphic novels with no movie rose just as much

Example: a claim with three parts

In this question, every choice reports evidence from the same pottery, so all four sound relevant. Split the conclusion into its parts first, then check each choice against them.

Worked example

Archaeologists examined ceramic sherds from coastal settlements associated with Culture A and inland settlements associated with Culture B, dated from 1500 to 200 BCE. Using geochemical fingerprinting to match clay sources and residue analysis to identify vessel contents, they investigated when sustained exchange between the two regions began. Based on these data, the researchers concluded that such trade began around 800 BCE.

Which finding, if true, would most directly support the researchers’ conclusion?

  1. A

    After about 800 BCE, many pottery sherds from inland B are made of clay geochemically matching A’s coastal sources and contain residues of marine fish oils, and contemporaneous A sherds contain residues of crops cultivated only in B; neither pattern occurs in sherds older than 800 BCE.

  2. B

    Decorative motifs characteristic of A begin appearing on B’s pottery around 800 BCE, but petrographic analysis indicates all of those sherds were formed from locally sourced clay.

  3. C

    After about 800 BCE, residue analysis shows marine fish oils appearing more often in sherds from inland B, but geochemical fingerprinting indicates those vessels were still made from inland B clay sources, and A sherds do not show residues of B-only crops.

  4. D

    After about 800 BCE, geochemical fingerprinting identifies a small number of B sherds made from A’s coastal clay, but they occur only in elite burial contexts and are rare in everyday refuse deposits, and A settlements show little to no evidence of B-only crop residues.

Step 1

Split the claim into its parts

The researchers studied when sustained exchange between the two regions began and concluded that such trade began around 800 BCE. That conclusion has three parts, and a supporting finding must show all of them:

Note: 1. Exchange
goods from each region turn up in the other
Note: 2. Sustained
regular, not a few rare pieces
Note: 3. Began
from about 800 BCE on, and not before

Predict: many pieces moving both ways, starting about 800 BCE and not before.

Step 2

Cross out the choices that miss a part

The claim needsABCD
1. Exchange✓ both ways✗ no goods✗ one way✗ one way
2. Sustained✓ many✗ none✓✗ rare
3. Began✓ none before✓✗ a rise only✗ not shown

Only A has a check in every row, and part 1 alone rules out the rest: only A has goods moving both ways.

C is the most tempting, because coastal fish oil in inland pots does show food moving inland. But the pots are inland clay, and nothing from B reaches A, so the exchange runs one way; and its fish oil only appears more often, so some reached B before 800 BCE. B has only a borrowed style on local clay: no goods moved at all. D has A's clay in B, but in a small number of sherds from elite burials, and almost nothing from B in A: rare and one way. B, C and D go.

Step 3

Check the last choice

A has goods both ways (A's clay and fish oil in B, B's crops in A), in many sherds, and neither pattern before 800 BCE, which is what began needs. All three parts hold. The answer is A.

Example: support a claim by ruling out another cause

In this question, the claim names one cause rather than another, and two choices fit both causes. Look for the one that rules out the cause the claim rejects.

Worked example

In a study of Aedes mosquitoes from a coastal city, geneticists Lila Park and Miguel Santos compared DNA from specimens collected in 1995 with DNA from specimens collected in 2020. They focused on a version of a gene they call detox-D, which is associated with producing a protein that can break down pyrethroid insecticides. Park and Santos found that the frequency of detox-D increased dramatically between 1995 and 2020. They argue that this increase was driven primarily by local natural selection favoring mosquitoes with detox-D because of the city’s insecticide spraying program, rather than by immigration of mosquitoes from other populations where detox-D was already common.

Which finding, if true, would most directly support Park and Santos’s argument?

  1. A

    In laboratory tests, mosquitoes with detox-D survived pyrethroid exposure more often than mosquitoes without detox-D, but the two groups survived similarly when no pyrethroids were present.

  2. B

    Across many genetic markers unrelated to resistance, the 1995 and 2020 city mosquitoes were very similar and distinct from nearby populations, yet detox-D shifted strongly in frequency.

  3. C

    City records show pyrethroid spraying began in the early 2000s, and mosquito samples collected soon after show the first increase in the frequency of detox-D.

  4. D

    In 2020, mosquitoes collected near the port had more detox-D than those from neighborhoods, and shipping traffic into the port rose substantially from 1995 to 2020.

Step 1

Put the claim in a few words

What they found: detox-D, a gene linked to breaking down pyrethroid insecticides, increased dramatically between 1995 and 2020. They credit local natural selection, because of the city’s insecticide spraying program, rather than immigration of mosquitoes from places where the gene was already common. The claim has two parts:

Note: 1. The cause
spraying favored the local mosquitoes that had detox-D
Note: 2. Not newcomers
mosquitoes moving in didn't bring it

Step 2

Predict the finding

The claim's real point is rather than. Most findings that fit spraying fit newcomers too: mosquitoes that flew in carrying detox-D would also survive the spray and spread. So the finding has to rule out the newcomers.

Predict: evidence that no outside mosquitoes moved in, while detox-D still rose.

Step 3

Cross out the choices that miss a part

The claim needsABCD
1. Fits selection by spraying✓✓✓✗
2. Rules out newcomers✗✓✗✗

C is the most tempting, because the gene rose right after spraying began, just as the claim says. But newcomers carrying detox-D would have thrived after spraying began too, so the timing fits both causes. A has the same problem: detox-D helps any mosquito survive the spray, local or not. D points to newcomers, with more detox-D near a busier port. A, C and D go.

Step 4

Check the last choice

Genes that have nothing to do with insecticide work like a family resemblance: if newcomers had moved in, the city's mosquitoes would have shifted toward the populations the newcomers came from. In B, across genes unrelated to resistance, the 2020 mosquitoes still matched the 1995 ones and differed from nearby populations, yet detox-D shifted strongly. No new family moved in, and only the gene the spray favors changed. Both parts hold. The answer is B.

Practice problems

These questions mix supporting and weakening, so on each one, put the claim in a few words and predict the finding before you read the choices.

Lakes and afternoon storms

Practice problem

Some meteorologists once assumed that small lakes in arid regions have little effect on local rainfall. Recent observations, however, suggest that even modest bodies of water can influence afternoon weather patterns. Meteorologist Ana Rivera proposes that these lakes help trigger nearby afternoon rainstorms by adding extra moisture to the air through evaporation.

Which finding, if true, would most directly support Rivera’s proposal?

Answer choices

Leaf litter and bee nests

Practice problem

Biologists studied nesting activity among solitary, ground-nesting bees in 40 urban gardens. Managers at half of the gardens left fallen leaves undisturbed from autumn through spring, whereas managers at the other gardens removed fallen leaves. The gardens with retained leaves averaged nearly three times as many active bee nests as the gardens where leaves were removed. Because the two groups of gardens were similar in area, soil moisture, and pesticide use, the researchers concluded that retaining leaf litter increases bee nesting by protecting overwintering bees from extreme changes in soil temperature.

Which finding, if true, would most directly weaken the researchers' conclusion?

Answer choices

A merchant’s imports

Practice problem

A historian is examining the business records of an eighteenth-century coastal merchant. The records distinguish goods imported by sea from goods purchased locally. A student claims that the merchant’s seaborne imports consisted exclusively of luxury goods and that all ordinary household goods in the merchant’s inventory were purchased locally.

Which finding, if true, would most directly weaken the student’s claim?

Answer choices

Gentians in cushion mats

Practice problem

Botanists studying alpine gentians found that the plants’ seedlings occur more often within mats formed by cushion plants than on nearby bare ground. The botanists hypothesize that cushion mats reduce overnight frost damage to already-germinated gentians rather than simply trapping more gentian seeds.

Which finding, if true, would most directly support the botanists’ hypothesis?

Answer choices

Finish the lesson

8 practice examples left

Finish the remaining questions correctly to complete this lesson.

Quick recap

  • The claim in a few words: the cause, the effect and the group, before you read the choices.
  • Compare the same groups: when the claim says more than, the finding must put the same winner ahead of the same groups.
  • Every link: number a chain's links and keep only a finding that shows all of them; a cause comes before its effect.
  • To weaken, pull the cause and effect apart: the cause without the effect, the effect without the cause, or another cause; to support a rather than claim, rule the other cause out.
  • Every question: put the claim in a few words, split it into parts, predict the finding, cross out what misses a part, then check the last choice.

Next lesson

Inferences about a study

Complete a text about a study: what each group showed, and what it can’t decide.

Start next lesson

Practice

Practice SAT Reading & Writing

Put what you learned to work on real SAT Reading & Writing questions.

Command of Evidence question bank