Command of Evidence SAT question

Choice C is the best answer because it presents the finding that, if true, would most strongly support Tannen’s hypothesis. According to the text, Tannen’s hypothesis is that multiple perspectives presented in a noncompetitive format is more informative than a debate between opposing viewpoints is. If participants who saw a panel of three commentators with various views about an issue answered more questions about the issue correctly than did participants who saw a debate, that would support Tannen’s hypothesis since it would show that participants who heard multiple varied perspectives were better informed than were participants who heard a debate between opposing viewpoints.

Choice A is incorrect because finding that participants perceived commentators in the debate as more knowledgeable than commentators in the panel is irrelevant to Tannen’s hypothesis, which is that presenting multiple perspectives on an issue is more informative to the audience than presenting opposing views of the issue is. Participants’ perception of how knowledgeable panelists are has no bearing on how much participants learn from the panelists. Choice B is incorrect because finding that participants perceived commentators in the panel as more knowledgeable than a single commentator is irrelevant to Tannen’s hypothesis, which is that presenting multiple perspectives on an issue is more informative to the audience than presenting opposing views of the issue is. Participants’ perception of how knowledgeable panelists are has no bearing on how much participants learn from the panelists, and Tannen’s hypothesis says nothing about how informative single commentators are. Choice D is incorrect because finding that participants who watched a single commentator answered more questions correctly than participants who watched the debate did wouldn’t be relevant to Tannen’s hypothesis, which is that hearing multiple varying perspectives is more informative than hearing a debate. Tannen’s hypothesis says nothing about how informative single commentators are.