Practice
Fifty original digital-SAT-style Command of Evidence questions for Topic 3-4: Interpreting Tables.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of first-time respondents, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records requests for guidance for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that rotating neighborhood desks shows a sustained increase in requests for guidance from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that rotating neighborhood desks shows a sustained increase in requests for guidance from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: rotating neighborhood desks rises at every measurement, from 33 requests at baseline to 49 requests at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: rotating neighborhood desks rises at every measurement, from 33 requests at baseline to 49 requests at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that rotating neighborhood desks shows a sustained increase in requests for guidance from baseline through follow-up.
rotating neighborhood desks: 33, 37, 43, 49 requests; one central desk: 57, 53, 49, 45 requests
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of poetry students, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records delivery-specific observations for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in delivery-specific observations between several reader recordings and one official recording narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in delivery-specific observations between several reader recordings and one official recording narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 observations at baseline to 7 observations at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 observations at baseline to 7 observations at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in delivery-specific observations between several reader recordings and one official recording narrows across the four measurements.
several reader recordings: 20, 25, 32, 39 observations; one official recording: 44, 40, 36, 32 observations
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Theo in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records confidence in her guidance for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that handing Amara the lantern exceeds keeping the lantern in confidence in her guidance by follow-up.
The team claims that handing Amara the lantern exceeds keeping the lantern in confidence in her guidance by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, handing Amara the lantern reaches 49 gestures, exceeding keeping the lantern at 39 gestures.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, handing Amara the lantern reaches 49 gestures, exceeding keeping the lantern at 39 gestures. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that handing Amara the lantern exceeds keeping the lantern in confidence in her guidance by follow-up.
handing Amara the lantern: 27, 33, 41, 49 gestures; keeping the lantern: 51, 47, 43, 39 gestures
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of aquatic insects, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records insects retained after high flow for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that flat stream stones changes more across the measurement period than rounded stream stones.
The team claims that flat stream stones changes more across the measurement period than rounded stream stones.
In the tabulated trial: flat stream stones changes by 25 %, while rounded stream stones changes by 12 % in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly illustrate the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly illustrates the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: flat stream stones changes by 25 %, while rounded stream stones changes by 12 % in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that flat stream stones changes more across the measurement period than rounded stream stones.
flat stream stones: 34, 41, 50, 59 %; rounded stream stones: 58, 54, 50, 46 %
The prompt asks for evidence that illustrates the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of transit riders, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records trips ending near the clinic for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that a route extended near a clinic shows a sustained increase in trips ending near the clinic from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that a route extended near a clinic shows a sustained increase in trips ending near the clinic from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: a route extended near a clinic rises at every measurement, from 21 trips at baseline to 49 trips at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: a route extended near a clinic rises at every measurement, from 21 trips at baseline to 49 trips at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that a route extended near a clinic shows a sustained increase in trips ending near the clinic from baseline through follow-up.
a route extended near a clinic: 21, 29, 39, 49 trips; the earlier route: 45, 41, 37, 33 trips
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of portrait viewers, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records identified revisions for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in identified revisions between infrared underdrawing images and finished-image-only displays narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in identified revisions between infrared underdrawing images and finished-image-only displays narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 revisions at baseline to 4 revisions at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 revisions at baseline to 4 revisions at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in identified revisions between infrared underdrawing images and finished-image-only displays narrows across the four measurements.
infrared underdrawing images: 28, 32, 38, 44 revisions; finished-image-only displays: 52, 48, 44, 40 revisions
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Sora in an original play, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records openness to improvisation for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that allowing street rhythm into the finale exceeds closing out every outside sound in openness to improvisation by follow-up.
The team claims that allowing street rhythm into the finale exceeds closing out every outside sound in openness to improvisation by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, allowing street rhythm into the finale reaches 54 stage choices, exceeding closing out every outside sound at 47 stage choices.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, allowing street rhythm into the finale reaches 54 stage choices, exceeding closing out every outside sound at 47 stage choices. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that allowing street rhythm into the finale exceeds closing out every outside sound in openness to improvisation by follow-up.
allowing street rhythm into the finale: 35, 40, 47, 54 stage choices; closing out every outside sound: 59, 55, 51, 47 stage choices
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of garden plots, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records afternoon humidity for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that dense ground cover changes more across the measurement period than bare soil.
The team claims that dense ground cover changes more across the measurement period than bare soil.
In the tabulated trial: dense ground cover changes by 22 %, while bare soil changes by 12 % in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: dense ground cover changes by 22 %, while bare soil changes by 12 % in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that dense ground cover changes more across the measurement period than bare soil.
dense ground cover: 22, 28, 36, 44 %; bare soil: 46, 42, 38, 34 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of archive users, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records successful record searches for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that bilingual transcripts shows a sustained increase in successful record searches from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that bilingual transcripts shows a sustained increase in successful record searches from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: bilingual transcripts rises at every measurement, from 29 % at baseline to 54 % at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: bilingual transcripts rises at every measurement, from 29 % at baseline to 54 % at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that bilingual transcripts shows a sustained increase in successful record searches from baseline through follow-up.
bilingual transcripts: 29, 36, 45, 54 %; single-language metadata: 53, 49, 45, 41 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of theater audiences, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records noticed performer interactions for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in noticed performer interactions between seats surrounding the stage and fixed front-facing rows narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in noticed performer interactions between seats surrounding the stage and fixed front-facing rows narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 16 % at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 16 % at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in noticed performer interactions between seats surrounding the stage and fixed front-facing rows narrows across the four measurements.
seats surrounding the stage: 36, 44, 54, 64 %; fixed front-facing rows: 60, 56, 52, 48 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Noor in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records openness to shared discovery for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that opening unscheduled viewing slots exceeds restricting every slot in openness to shared discovery by follow-up.
The team claims that opening unscheduled viewing slots exceeds restricting every slot in openness to shared discovery by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, opening unscheduled viewing slots reaches 39 decisions, exceeding restricting every slot at 35 decisions.
The selected values directly illustrate the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly illustrates the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, opening unscheduled viewing slots reaches 39 decisions, exceeding restricting every slot at 35 decisions. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that opening unscheduled viewing slots exceeds restricting every slot in openness to shared discovery by follow-up.
opening unscheduled viewing slots: 23, 27, 33, 39 decisions; restricting every slot: 47, 43, 39, 35 decisions
The prompt asks for evidence that illustrates the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of building tiles, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records strength after wetting for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that high recycled-glass content changes more across the measurement period than low recycled-glass content.
The team claims that high recycled-glass content changes more across the measurement period than low recycled-glass content.
In the tabulated trial: high recycled-glass content changes by 19 %, while low recycled-glass content changes by 12 % in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: high recycled-glass content changes by 19 %, while low recycled-glass content changes by 12 % in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that high recycled-glass content changes more across the measurement period than low recycled-glass content.
high recycled-glass content: 30, 35, 42, 49 %; low recycled-glass content: 54, 50, 46, 42 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of meeting attendees, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records question-period participation for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that a portable hearing loop shows a sustained increase in question-period participation from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that a portable hearing loop shows a sustained increase in question-period participation from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: a portable hearing loop rises at every measurement, from 37 questions at baseline to 59 questions at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: a portable hearing loop rises at every measurement, from 37 questions at baseline to 59 questions at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that a portable hearing loop shows a sustained increase in question-period participation from baseline through follow-up.
a portable hearing loop: 37, 43, 51, 59 questions; standard room audio: 61, 57, 53, 49 questions
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of photography viewers, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records distinct interpretations for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in distinct interpretations between captions shown after viewing and captions shown before viewing narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in distinct interpretations between captions shown after viewing and captions shown before viewing narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 interpretations at baseline to 13 interpretations at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 interpretations at baseline to 13 interpretations at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in distinct interpretations between captions shown after viewing and captions shown before viewing narrows across the four measurements.
captions shown after viewing: 24, 31, 40, 49 interpretations; captions shown before viewing: 48, 44, 40, 36 interpretations
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Kavi in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records willingness to revise a plan for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that asking Leena to redraw the route exceeds insisting on his damaged map in willingness to revise a plan by follow-up.
The team claims that asking Leena to redraw the route exceeds insisting on his damaged map in willingness to revise a plan by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, asking Leena to redraw the route reaches 59 actions, exceeding insisting on his damaged map at 43 actions.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, asking Leena to redraw the route reaches 59 actions, exceeding insisting on his damaged map at 43 actions. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that asking Leena to redraw the route exceeds insisting on his damaged map in willingness to revise a plan by follow-up.
asking Leena to redraw the route: 31, 39, 49, 59 actions; insisting on his damaged map: 55, 51, 47, 43 actions
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of model turbine blades, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records noise reduction for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that textured trailing edges changes more across the measurement period than plain trailing edges.
The team claims that textured trailing edges changes more across the measurement period than plain trailing edges.
In the tabulated trial: textured trailing edges changes by 16 dB, while plain trailing edges changes by 12 dB in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: textured trailing edges changes by 16 dB, while plain trailing edges changes by 12 dB in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that textured trailing edges changes more across the measurement period than plain trailing edges.
textured trailing edges: 18, 22, 28, 34 dB; plain trailing edges: 42, 38, 34, 30 dB
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of neighborhood residents, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records postal codes represented for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that comment boxes in libraries shows a sustained increase in postal codes represented from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that comment boxes in libraries shows a sustained increase in postal codes represented from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: comment boxes in libraries rises at every measurement, from 25 codes at baseline to 44 codes at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: comment boxes in libraries rises at every measurement, from 25 codes at baseline to 44 codes at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that comment boxes in libraries shows a sustained increase in postal codes represented from baseline through follow-up.
comment boxes in libraries: 25, 30, 37, 44 codes; a city-hall-only box: 49, 45, 41, 37 codes
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of ceramic fragments, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records cross-vessel matches for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in cross-vessel matches between organization by tool marks and organization by color narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in cross-vessel matches between organization by tool marks and organization by color narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 matches at baseline to 10 matches at follow-up.
The selected values directly illustrate the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly illustrates the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 matches at baseline to 10 matches at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in cross-vessel matches between organization by tool marks and organization by color narrows across the four measurements.
organization by tool marks: 32, 38, 46, 54 matches; organization by color: 56, 52, 48, 44 matches
The prompt asks for evidence that illustrates the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Inez in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records adaptation without erasure for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that adding a substitute in pencil exceeds erasing the original line in adaptation without erasure by follow-up.
The team claims that adding a substitute in pencil exceeds erasing the original line in adaptation without erasure by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, adding a substitute in pencil reaches 44 details, exceeding erasing the original line at 31 details.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, adding a substitute in pencil reaches 44 details, exceeding erasing the original line at 31 details. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that adding a substitute in pencil exceeds erasing the original line in adaptation without erasure by follow-up.
adding a substitute in pencil: 19, 26, 35, 44 details; erasing the original line: 43, 39, 35, 31 details
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of greenhouse roots, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records root depth for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that less frequent deep watering changes more across the measurement period than daily shallow watering.
The team claims that less frequent deep watering changes more across the measurement period than daily shallow watering.
In the tabulated trial: less frequent deep watering changes by 28 cm, while daily shallow watering changes by 12 cm in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: less frequent deep watering changes by 28 cm, while daily shallow watering changes by 12 cm in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that less frequent deep watering changes more across the measurement period than daily shallow watering.
less frequent deep watering: 26, 34, 44, 54 cm; daily shallow watering: 50, 46, 42, 38 cm
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of service employees, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records participation for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that after-work voting shows a sustained increase in participation from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that after-work voting shows a sustained increase in participation from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: after-work voting rises at every measurement, from 33 voters at baseline to 49 voters at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: after-work voting rises at every measurement, from 33 voters at baseline to 49 voters at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that after-work voting shows a sustained increase in participation from baseline through follow-up.
after-work voting: 33, 37, 43, 49 voters; noon-only voting: 57, 53, 49, 45 voters
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of theater historians, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records casting links identified for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in casting links identified between digitized page margins and cropped central text narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in casting links identified between digitized page margins and cropped central text narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 links at baseline to 7 links at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 links at baseline to 7 links at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in casting links identified between digitized page margins and cropped central text narrows across the four measurements.
digitized page margins: 20, 25, 32, 39 links; cropped central text: 44, 40, 36, 32 links
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Yara in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records willingness to teach revision for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that showing a crossed-out draft exceeds showing only the final poem in willingness to teach revision by follow-up.
The team claims that showing a crossed-out draft exceeds showing only the final poem in willingness to teach revision by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, showing a crossed-out draft reaches 49 actions, exceeding showing only the final poem at 39 actions.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, showing a crossed-out draft reaches 49 actions, exceeding showing only the final poem at 39 actions. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that showing a crossed-out draft exceeds showing only the final poem in willingness to teach revision by follow-up.
showing a crossed-out draft: 27, 33, 41, 49 actions; showing only the final poem: 51, 47, 43, 39 actions
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of deep-reef light sensors, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records recorded light spikes for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that uncovered vehicle lamps changes more across the measurement period than covered lamps.
The team claims that uncovered vehicle lamps changes more across the measurement period than covered lamps.
In the tabulated trial: uncovered vehicle lamps changes by 25 spikes, while covered lamps changes by 12 spikes in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: uncovered vehicle lamps changes by 25 spikes, while covered lamps changes by 12 spikes in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that uncovered vehicle lamps changes more across the measurement period than covered lamps.
uncovered vehicle lamps: 34, 41, 50, 59 spikes; covered lamps: 58, 54, 50, 46 spikes
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of shift workers, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records weekday visits for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that late museum hours shows a sustained increase in weekday visits from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that late museum hours shows a sustained increase in weekday visits from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: late museum hours rises at every measurement, from 21 visits at baseline to 49 visits at follow-up.
The selected values directly illustrate the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly illustrates the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: late museum hours rises at every measurement, from 21 visits at baseline to 49 visits at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that late museum hours shows a sustained increase in weekday visits from baseline through follow-up.
late museum hours: 21, 29, 39, 49 visits; daytime-only hours: 45, 41, 37, 33 visits
The prompt asks for evidence that illustrates the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of design researchers, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records cross-period connections for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in cross-period connections between a color-based index and a date-based index narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in cross-period connections between a color-based index and a date-based index narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 connections at baseline to 4 connections at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 connections at baseline to 4 connections at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in cross-period connections between a color-based index and a date-based index narrows across the four measurements.
a color-based index: 28, 32, 38, 44 connections; a date-based index: 52, 48, 44, 40 connections
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Sami in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records revaluation of imperfection for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that rehanging the rough-toned bell exceeds keeping it silent in revaluation of imperfection by follow-up.
The team claims that rehanging the rough-toned bell exceeds keeping it silent in revaluation of imperfection by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, rehanging the rough-toned bell reaches 54 choices, exceeding keeping it silent at 47 choices.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, rehanging the rough-toned bell reaches 54 choices, exceeding keeping it silent at 47 choices. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that rehanging the rough-toned bell exceeds keeping it silent in revaluation of imperfection by follow-up.
rehanging the rough-toned bell: 35, 40, 47, 54 choices; keeping it silent: 59, 55, 51, 47 choices
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of rooftop plants, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records living leaves after drought for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that deeper soil changes more across the measurement period than shallow soil.
The team claims that deeper soil changes more across the measurement period than shallow soil.
In the tabulated trial: deeper soil changes by 22 %, while shallow soil changes by 12 % in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: deeper soil changes by 22 %, while shallow soil changes by 12 % in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that deeper soil changes more across the measurement period than shallow soil.
deeper soil: 22, 28, 36, 44 %; shallow soil: 46, 42, 38, 34 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of full-time workers, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records registrations for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that Saturday workshops shows a sustained increase in registrations from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that Saturday workshops shows a sustained increase in registrations from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: Saturday workshops rises at every measurement, from 29 people at baseline to 54 people at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: Saturday workshops rises at every measurement, from 29 people at baseline to 54 people at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that Saturday workshops shows a sustained increase in registrations from baseline through follow-up.
Saturday workshops: 29, 36, 45, 54 people; weekday-morning workshops: 53, 49, 45, 41 people
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of delivery robots on wet ramps, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records successful climbs for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in successful climbs between textured wheel bands and smooth wheel bands narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in successful climbs between textured wheel bands and smooth wheel bands narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 16 % at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 16 % at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in successful climbs between textured wheel bands and smooth wheel bands narrows across the four measurements.
textured wheel bands: 36, 44, 54, 64 %; smooth wheel bands: 60, 56, 52, 48 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of library visitors, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records completed visits for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that evening opening hours exceeds daytime-only hours in completed visits by follow-up.
The team claims that evening opening hours exceeds daytime-only hours in completed visits by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, evening opening hours reaches 39 visits, exceeding daytime-only hours at 35 visits.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, evening opening hours reaches 39 visits, exceeding daytime-only hours at 35 visits. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that evening opening hours exceeds daytime-only hours in completed visits by follow-up.
evening opening hours: 23, 27, 33, 39 visits; daytime-only hours: 47, 43, 39, 35 visits
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of museum visitors, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records identified revisions for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that layer-by-layer labels changes more across the measurement period than single summary labels.
The team claims that layer-by-layer labels changes more across the measurement period than single summary labels.
In the tabulated trial: layer-by-layer labels changes by 19 %, while single summary labels changes by 12 % in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly illustrate the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly illustrates the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: layer-by-layer labels changes by 19 %, while single summary labels changes by 12 % in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that layer-by-layer labels changes more across the measurement period than single summary labels.
layer-by-layer labels: 30, 35, 42, 49 %; single summary labels: 54, 50, 46, 42 %
The prompt asks for evidence that illustrates the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Mira in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records candor about uncertainty for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that speaking before the council shows a sustained increase in candor about uncertainty from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that speaking before the council shows a sustained increase in candor about uncertainty from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: speaking before the council rises at every measurement, from 37 instances at baseline to 59 instances at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: speaking before the council rises at every measurement, from 37 instances at baseline to 59 instances at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that speaking before the council shows a sustained increase in candor about uncertainty from baseline through follow-up.
speaking before the council: 37, 43, 51, 59 instances; speaking privately to Ivo: 61, 57, 53, 49 instances
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of coastal seedlings, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records surviving leaves for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in surviving leaves between low-salt irrigation and high-salt irrigation narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in surviving leaves between low-salt irrigation and high-salt irrigation narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 leaves at baseline to 13 leaves at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 leaves at baseline to 13 leaves at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in surviving leaves between low-salt irrigation and high-salt irrigation narrows across the four measurements.
low-salt irrigation: 24, 31, 40, 49 leaves; high-salt irrigation: 48, 44, 40, 36 leaves
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of first-time voters, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records correctly completed sample ballots for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that a translated guide exceeds a single-language guide in correctly completed sample ballots by follow-up.
The team claims that a translated guide exceeds a single-language guide in correctly completed sample ballots by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, a translated guide reaches 59 %, exceeding a single-language guide at 43 %.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, a translated guide reaches 59 %, exceeding a single-language guide at 43 %. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that a translated guide exceeds a single-language guide in correctly completed sample ballots by follow-up.
a translated guide: 31, 39, 49, 59 %; a single-language guide: 55, 51, 47, 43 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of student percussionists, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records synchronized entries for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that rhythm-first rehearsal changes more across the measurement period than melody-first rehearsal.
The team claims that rhythm-first rehearsal changes more across the measurement period than melody-first rehearsal.
In the tabulated trial: rhythm-first rehearsal changes by 16 %, while melody-first rehearsal changes by 12 % in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: rhythm-first rehearsal changes by 16 %, while melody-first rehearsal changes by 12 % in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that rhythm-first rehearsal changes more across the measurement period than melody-first rehearsal.
rhythm-first rehearsal: 18, 22, 28, 34 %; melody-first rehearsal: 42, 38, 34, 30 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Jonas in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records acceptance of imperfection for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that displaying the patched kite shows a sustained increase in acceptance of imperfection from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that displaying the patched kite shows a sustained increase in acceptance of imperfection from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: displaying the patched kite rises at every measurement, from 25 details at baseline to 44 details at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: displaying the patched kite rises at every measurement, from 25 details at baseline to 44 details at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that displaying the patched kite shows a sustained increase in acceptance of imperfection from baseline through follow-up.
displaying the patched kite: 25, 30, 37, 44 details; hiding it in the shed: 49, 45, 41, 37 details
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of identical roof tiles, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records retained heat for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in retained heat between reflective coating and plain coating narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in retained heat between reflective coating and plain coating narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 °C at baseline to 10 °C at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 °C at baseline to 10 °C at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in retained heat between reflective coating and plain coating narrows across the four measurements.
reflective coating: 32, 38, 46, 54 °C; plain coating: 56, 52, 48, 44 °C
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of rural archive donors, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records documents contributed for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that mobile scanning visits exceeds city-only scanning in documents contributed by follow-up.
The team claims that mobile scanning visits exceeds city-only scanning in documents contributed by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, mobile scanning visits reaches 44 items, exceeding city-only scanning at 31 items.
The selected values directly illustrate the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly illustrates the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, mobile scanning visits reaches 44 items, exceeding city-only scanning at 31 items. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that mobile scanning visits exceeds city-only scanning in documents contributed by follow-up.
mobile scanning visits: 19, 26, 35, 44 items; city-only scanning: 43, 39, 35, 31 items
The prompt asks for evidence that illustrates the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of gallery visitors, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records material-specific observations for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that touchable material samples changes more across the measurement period than text-only labels.
The team claims that touchable material samples changes more across the measurement period than text-only labels.
In the tabulated trial: touchable material samples changes by 28 comments, while text-only labels changes by 12 comments in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: touchable material samples changes by 28 comments, while text-only labels changes by 12 comments in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that touchable material samples changes more across the measurement period than text-only labels.
touchable material samples: 26, 34, 44, 54 comments; text-only labels: 50, 46, 42, 38 comments
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Sana in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records readiness to collaborate for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that moving a new colleague's chair closer shows a sustained increase in readiness to collaborate from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that moving a new colleague's chair closer shows a sustained increase in readiness to collaborate from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: moving a new colleague's chair closer rises at every measurement, from 33 actions at baseline to 49 actions at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: moving a new colleague's chair closer rises at every measurement, from 33 actions at baseline to 49 actions at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that moving a new colleague's chair closer shows a sustained increase in readiness to collaborate from baseline through follow-up.
moving a new colleague's chair closer: 33, 37, 43, 49 actions; leaving the chair apart: 57, 53, 49, 45 actions
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of solitary bees, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records occupied nesting tubes for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in occupied nesting tubes between east-facing nest openings and west-facing openings narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in occupied nesting tubes between east-facing nest openings and west-facing openings narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 7 % at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 7 % at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in occupied nesting tubes between east-facing nest openings and west-facing openings narrows across the four measurements.
east-facing nest openings: 20, 25, 32, 39 %; west-facing openings: 44, 40, 36, 32 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of hourly workers, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records completed applications for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that Saturday permit appointments exceeds weekday-only appointments in completed applications by follow-up.
The team claims that Saturday permit appointments exceeds weekday-only appointments in completed applications by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, Saturday permit appointments reaches 49 applications, exceeding weekday-only appointments at 39 applications.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, Saturday permit appointments reaches 49 applications, exceeding weekday-only appointments at 39 applications. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that Saturday permit appointments exceeds weekday-only appointments in completed applications by follow-up.
Saturday permit appointments: 27, 33, 41, 49 applications; weekday-only appointments: 51, 47, 43, 39 applications
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of art students, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records cross-period comparisons for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that theme-based gallery routes changes more across the measurement period than chronological routes.
The team claims that theme-based gallery routes changes more across the measurement period than chronological routes.
In the tabulated trial: theme-based gallery routes changes by 25 comparisons, while chronological routes changes by 12 comparisons in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: theme-based gallery routes changes by 25 comparisons, while chronological routes changes by 12 comparisons in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that theme-based gallery routes changes more across the measurement period than chronological routes.
theme-based gallery routes: 34, 41, 50, 59 comparisons; chronological routes: 58, 54, 50, 46 comparisons
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Eren in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records trust in the group for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that sharing the damaged ledger shows a sustained increase in trust in the group from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that sharing the damaged ledger shows a sustained increase in trust in the group from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: sharing the damaged ledger rises at every measurement, from 21 choices at baseline to 49 choices at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
In the tabulated trial: sharing the damaged ledger rises at every measurement, from 21 choices at baseline to 49 choices at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that sharing the damaged ledger shows a sustained increase in trust in the group from baseline through follow-up.
sharing the damaged ledger: 21, 29, 39, 49 choices; concealing its missing pages: 45, 41, 37, 33 choices
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of forest moss samples, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records retained moisture for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in retained moisture between porous shade cover and open exposure narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in retained moisture between porous shade cover and open exposure narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 4 % at follow-up.
The selected values directly illustrate the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly illustrates the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 4 % at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in retained moisture between porous shade cover and open exposure narrows across the four measurements.
porous shade cover: 28, 32, 38, 44 %; open exposure: 52, 48, 44, 40 %
The prompt asks for evidence that illustrates the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical history social studies investigation of housing applicants, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records on-time responses for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that plain-language deadlines exceeds legalistic deadlines in on-time responses by follow-up.
The team claims that plain-language deadlines exceeds legalistic deadlines in on-time responses by follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, plain-language deadlines reaches 54 %, exceeding legalistic deadlines at 47 %.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: At follow-up, plain-language deadlines reaches 54 %, exceeding legalistic deadlines at 47 %. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that plain-language deadlines exceeds legalistic deadlines in on-time responses by follow-up.
plain-language deadlines: 35, 40, 47, 54 %; legalistic deadlines: 59, 55, 51, 47 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical humanities investigation of viewers of one silent scene, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records cautious character descriptions for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that a cautious musical score changes more across the measurement period than an urgent musical score.
The team claims that a cautious musical score changes more across the measurement period than an urgent musical score.
In the tabulated trial: a cautious musical score changes by 22 %, while an urgent musical score changes by 12 % in the opposite direction.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
In the tabulated trial: a cautious musical score changes by 22 %, while an urgent musical score changes by 12 % in the opposite direction. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that a cautious musical score changes more across the measurement period than an urgent musical score.
a cautious musical score: 22, 28, 36, 44 %; an urgent musical score: 46, 42, 38, 34 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical literature investigation of Asha in an original story, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records respect for shared history for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that mending the banner visibly shows a sustained increase in respect for shared history from baseline through follow-up.
The team claims that mending the banner visibly shows a sustained increase in respect for shared history from baseline through follow-up.
In the tabulated trial: mending the banner visibly rises at every measurement, from 29 images at baseline to 54 images at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
In the tabulated trial: mending the banner visibly rises at every measurement, from 29 images at baseline to 54 images at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that mending the banner visibly shows a sustained increase in respect for shared history from baseline through follow-up.
mending the banner visibly: 29, 36, 45, 54 images; replacing it without a trace: 53, 49, 45, 41 images
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
In a hypothetical science investigation of stored seeds, researchers recorded the original synthetic data shown in the table. The fictional dataset records post-thaw germination for two named conditions across four measurements. The team claims that the gap in post-thaw germination between sealed packets and porous packets narrows across the four measurements.
The team claims that the gap in post-thaw germination between sealed packets and porous packets narrows across the four measurements.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 16 % at follow-up.
The selected values directly support the claim using the correct categories, series, and units.
This statement makes a mathematically valid but evidentially irrelevant comparison, so it does not establish the claimed relationship.
Correct. The statement cites the exact relevant values and directly supports the supplied claim.
This statement uses values from a real category in the graphic, but that category or time point does not test the full claim.
This statement reads a valid value from the wrong series or reports one series without the required contrast.
In the tabulated trial: The conditions' gap narrows from 24 % at baseline to 16 % at follow-up. This comparison directly addresses the relationship and scope specified in the claim.
The team claims that the gap in post-thaw germination between sealed packets and porous packets narrows across the four measurements.
sealed packets: 36, 44, 54, 64 %; porous packets: 60, 56, 52, 48 %
The prompt asks for evidence that supports the claim; the key does so without changing categories, series, time, or units.
Keyboard: use Tab to move, arrow keys to change answer choices, and Enter to check an answer.
Use the results to decide what to review before your next attempt.
No mistakes this time. Excellent work.