A finding question tests whether evidence supports the proposed reason for a result. Read the proposal and put its cause and effect in a few words, including the groups it compares. Predict what would show every link: a supporting finding connects each change to the next for those groups. If the proposal rejects another cause, ask what would help tell the causes apart. Facts about the same topic can still leave a needed link untested.
Hints
- Hint 1
Look at the researchers’ proposal about better recall. What does it say uncertainty prompted visitors to do?
- Hint 2
Split the proposal into links: what uncertainty changes about visitors’ looking, and how that looking might affect memory.
- Hint 3
The phrase rather than adds another test. Ask whether the finding connects repeated comparisons to recall and distinguishes them from broader inspection.
Step-by-step
Trace the cause of better recall
Step 1Build the proposed chain
Both groups spent the same total time at the exhibit, yet unresolved-label visitors remembered more, so extra viewing time can't explain their advantage. What cause do the researchers propose? Their chain is uncertainty leads to repeated checks between label claims and cited features, which lead to better recall of visible details.
- Step 2
Tell the two causes apart
What would separate repeated checking from inspecting the artifact more broadly? We'd expect uncertainty to change how often visitors compare claims with cited features, not how widely they look across the object. Those checks must also explain better memory for visible details, since more checking alone doesn't explain better recall.
- Step 3
Find the missing links
Which findings break that chain? Shifts landing equally on cited and uncited features aren't focused on cited features, and recall is linked to broader viewing. The finding that predicts recall of label wording measures memory for words instead of the artifact’s visible details. When the groups did not differ in shift frequency, uncertainty hasn't led to more checking, even if checking goes with better recall.
- Step 4
Explain the recall gap
How does the remaining finding explain the recall advantage? Unresolved-label visitors make more shifts between claims and cited features without viewing more object regions, so the finding shows focused checking instead of broader inspection. Taking shift frequency into account means comparing the groups at the same checking frequency, and their recall difference then disappears. The extra checking explains the difference in recall, connecting the proposed cause to better memory for object details. Choice A.