Question 105·Hard·Command of Evidence
A team of psychologists trained participants in one of two emotion-regulation strategies before showing them a short, upsetting film clip. One group was trained to use cognitive reappraisal (reinterpreting the situation to feel less upset), and the other group was trained to use emotion labeling (naming the feeling they were experiencing). After the clip, participants rated their distress on a scale from 0 (no distress) to 100 (extreme distress).
The researchers also measured each participant’s tendency to ruminate (repeatedly dwelling on negative experiences) on a scale of 1 (least ruminative) to 7 (most ruminative). Looking at distress ratings by rumination score, the researchers concluded that reappraisal led to lower distress than labeling except among participants with high rumination scores.
Which choice best describes data from the graph that support the researchers’ conclusion?
For command-of-evidence graph questions, translate the researchers’ conclusion into a specific visual pattern you expect to see (for example, “A is lower than B except at high values”). Then verify that pattern across the relevant ranges on the graph. Eliminate choices that (1) describe only one part of the conclusion, (2) replace “except” with an absolute claim, or (3) describe trends within one line without directly comparing the two conditions where the conclusion makes its key comparison.
Hints
Look for an exception
The conclusion includes the word “except.” Find where the relationship between the two lines changes.
Compare at low vs. high scores
Check whether one line is consistently lower than the other for rumination scores 1–5, and then check scores 6–7 separately.
Beware of absolute wording
Be cautious with choices that claim something happens at every rumination score; verify the end of the graph.
Step-by-step Explanation
Restate the conclusion to be supported
The conclusion says reappraisal produces lower distress than labeling except among participants with high rumination scores. So the graph should show reappraisal below labeling at low-to-moderate rumination, but not below labeling at high rumination.
Compare the two lines at low-to-moderate rumination
At rumination scores 1 through 5, the reappraisal points are consistently below the labeling points (lower distress each time). That supports the “reappraisal led to lower distress” part.
Check what happens at high rumination
At rumination scores 6 and 7, reappraisal is no longer lower than labeling: it is slightly higher at 6 and higher again at 7. That supports the “except among participants with high rumination scores” part.
Select the choice that matches both patterns
The option that states reappraisal is lower for scores 1–5 but about the same or higher for scores 6–7 is correct: From scores 1–5, reappraisal shows lower distress than labeling; at scores 6–7, reappraisal is about the same as or higher than labeling.