For evidence questions about a proposed mechanism, divide the proposal into a complete causal chain: the experimental condition, the predicted behavior, the relevant outcome, and any rejected alternative. Compare every choice against all parts of that chain, since a strong distractor may support several components while failing to connect the mechanism to either its proposed cause or its outcome.
Hints
- Hint 1
Map the causal chain
Identify what is proposed to cause the viewing behavior, what specific behavior should occur, and what memory outcome that behavior should explain.
- Hint 2
Check the alternative explanation
Determine whether each finding favors selective comparison with cited features or broader inspection of the artifact.
- Hint 3
Distinguish complete from partial support
A finding may establish a viewing pattern or a relationship with recall without showing that label uncertainty produced the full proposed mechanism.
Step-by-step
- Step 1
Identify the complete proposal
The researchers propose that label uncertainty led visitors to compare individual claims with the particular features those claims cited. They further propose that this selective behavior, rather than broader inspection, produced the advantage in recalling visible details.
- Step 2
Evaluate the behavioral evidence
The correct finding shows that unresolved-label visitors shifted their gaze more often between individual claims and corresponding cited features while viewing no more distinct regions. This matches the proposed selective comparison and weighs against broader inspection.
- Step 3
Connect the behavior to the outcome
Once shift frequency was taken into account, the groups’ difference in recall disappeared. That result indicates that the selective shifts can account for the unresolved-label group’s recall advantage, supporting the proposed mechanism more completely than the other findings do.