Evidence Evaluation & Support Flashcards
7 cards from real AWA practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Evidence Evaluation & Support flashcards as text
An AWA argument uses the phrase 'many experts agree' without naming sources. Why is this evidence weak?
Answer: Vague attribution prevents verification and assessment of the experts' qualifications or consensus size
Without identifying who the experts are or how many, readers cannot verify the claim or assess whether it reflects genuine consensus.
Which scenario best illustrates the 'false equivalence' flaw in using evidence?
Answer: Treating a blog post and a peer-reviewed journal article as equally credible evidence
False equivalence occurs when sources with vastly different levels of rigor or credibility are treated as if they carry equal evidentiary weight.
An argument presents data showing test scores rose after a new curriculum was adopted and concludes the curriculum caused the improvement. What alternative explanation should be explored?
Answer: Whether other changes—such as new teachers, increased funding, or a different student cohort—occurred simultaneously
Post hoc reasoning assumes the curriculum caused score improvements, but concurrent changes could be the actual cause.
In AWA evidence evaluation, what is a 'confounding variable'?
Answer: An unmeasured factor that influences both the studied cause and the outcome, distorting the apparent relationship
A confounding variable creates a spurious association between two factors by independently affecting both, making causation impossible to establish without controlling for it.
An AWA argument states that since violent crime fell in cities that adopted a specific policing strategy, the strategy reduced crime. A strong critique would ask:
Answer: Whether crime was already declining nationally, making the local drop unremarkable
A national downward trend in violent crime would mean the local decline is expected regardless of the strategy, undermining the causal claim.
Which of the following is the strongest form of evidence for an AWA argument about whether a medication is effective?
Answer: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial published in a peer-reviewed journal
Randomized controlled trials with blinding and placebo controls minimize bias and confounding, making them the gold standard for establishing medical efficacy.
An argument uses absolute numbers—'10,000 people complained'—rather than rates to support a claim about widespread dissatisfaction. What concern does this raise?
Answer: Without knowing the total population size, 10,000 complaints could represent a tiny fraction of users
Context is critical: 10,000 complaints out of 10 million users (0.1%) indicates very different levels of dissatisfaction than 10,000 out of 12,000 users (83%).