CCTST Explanation Skills 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Which of the following best illustrates a 'coherent argument presentation' as part of explanation skills?
- Listing random facts related to the topic without connecting them
- Presenting premises in a logical sequence that leads clearly to the conclusion (Correct answer)
- Stating the conclusion first and then changing the subject
- Using emotional appeals to make the explanation memorable
Correct answer: Presenting premises in a logical sequence that leads clearly to the conclusion
Coherent argument presentation requires that premises are organized in a logical sequence that visibly and directly supports the stated conclusion.
Question 2: A nurse explains to a patient why a procedure is necessary by describing the underlying medical condition and the expected outcomes. This is an example of:
- Persuasion through emotion rather than reason
- Providing a functional and evidence-based explanation tailored to the audience (Correct answer)
- Oversharing irrelevant clinical details
- Avoiding the patient's actual concerns
Correct answer: Providing a functional and evidence-based explanation tailored to the audience
An effective explanation links the condition to the intervention and to expected outcomes, providing a functional, evidence-based rationale appropriate for the audience.
Question 3: Which of the following is an example of 'presenting evidence' as a component of explanation?
- Stating what you believe without reference to data
- Citing specific data, studies, or observations that support the claim being made (Correct answer)
- Offering your personal opinion as the basis for the claim
- Restating the claim in more confident language
Correct answer: Citing specific data, studies, or observations that support the claim being made
Presenting evidence means offering specific, verifiable data or observations that provide grounds for accepting the claim being explained.
Question 4: When an explanation contains internally contradictory statements, this is a failure of:
- Relevance
- Logical consistency within the explanation (Correct answer)
- Breadth of evidence
- Audience awareness
Correct answer: Logical consistency within the explanation
Internal contradictions violate logical consistency, meaning the explanation cannot be coherent if it simultaneously asserts incompatible claims.
Question 5: A policy analyst says: 'Crime dropped after the new law passed, so the law caused the drop.' A critical thinker reviewing this explanation would flag:
- The use of the word 'dropped' as ambiguous
- The post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy — assuming causation from temporal sequence alone (Correct answer)
- The irrelevance of crime statistics to policy
- The analyst's lack of credentials
Correct answer: The post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy — assuming causation from temporal sequence alone
Assuming causation simply because one event followed another is the post hoc fallacy, a classic explanatory error on the CCTST.
Question 6: Which feature most distinguishes a 'strong' explanation from a 'weak' one on the CCTST?
- Length and detail of the explanation
- The extent to which the explanation is backed by relevant evidence and sound reasoning (Correct answer)
- The use of formal academic language
- Whether the explanation confirms a popular belief
Correct answer: The extent to which the explanation is backed by relevant evidence and sound reasoning
Strength of explanation on the CCTST is determined by how well evidence and sound reasoning support the claim, not by length or style.
Question 7: A critical thinker reviewing her own written explanation notices the reasoning could support more than one conclusion. The best next step is to:
- Submit the explanation as-is and let the reader decide
- Revise the explanation to specify which conclusion follows and why the alternatives do not (Correct answer)
- Remove all evidence to simplify the explanation
- Add more conclusions to cover all possibilities
Correct answer: Revise the explanation to specify which conclusion follows and why the alternatives do not
When reasoning is ambiguous, a skilled thinker revises to explicitly identify which conclusion is supported and eliminate ambiguity about alternatives.
CCTST Explanation Skills 4
Which of the following best illustrates a 'coherent argument presentation' as part of explanation skills?