Reading comp PrepTest 142 · Section 3 · Question 14
Passage
Questions 9-16 . "Stealing thunder" is a courtroom strategy that . consists in a lawyer's revealing negative information .
Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Legal Studies
Paragraph 1
Despite there being no research, limited trials and psychological explanations back up the effectiveness of stealing thunder, though it may have some limitations.
Key Lines:
Lines 1-4 - A strategy is described Lines 13-20 - The strategy's effectiveness is backed up
Line 20 - A first reason is introduced
Lines 25-26 - A second reason is introduced
Line 33 - A third reason is introduced
Line 41 - A limitation is introduced on the third reason
Line 44 - A fourth reason is introduced
Lines 48-50 - A limitation on the fourth reason is introduced
Meta-Structure:
List of Reasons - This passage heavily relies on working through a list of different reasons that a certain strategy works. When such a list dominates a passage, it's important to know what the list is of, where each element on it starts, and what each element generally says.
Last Thoughts:
The limitations placed on certain reasons presented in the list will definitely feature in some questions, and we should be sure that those limitations are reflected in any big-picture question, such as the Main Point question.
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- A legal strategy used by lawyers is described, and the rationale behind it explained
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- "Stealing Thunder" (ST)
- Strategy - Revealing damaging information about yourself before your opponent can
- Use (Lawyers) - Only when that damaging info will come out/opponent knows
- Rationale - Less damaging if you're the one to reveal it
- Paragraph note
- Reasons why ST is effective
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- No research, but lawyers believe, and it's backed up
- Psychological reason - Revealing damaging info increases your credibility
- Psychological reason - Previewing the opposition's argument gets people primed to be critical of it/resist persuasion
- "Economic" reason - Scarcer resources are seen as more valuable, and if both sides bring up a piece of info, it's less valuable (unless it's REALLY big)
- Paragraph note
- Another reason for ST is presented, and then a limitation
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Last reason - Lawyer can frame evidence to downplay it, or present it positively
- Analogy - Like a politician spinning
- Jurors - "Eager" to solidify their view
- Limitation - If it can't be presented positively, it might poison the jurors and cause them to see everything negatively
Despite there being no research, limited trials and psychological explanations back up the effectiveness of stealing thunder, though it may have some limitations.
Key Lines:
Lines 1-4 - A strategy is described Lines 13-20 - The strategy's effectiveness is backed up
Line 20 - A first reason is introduced
Lines 25-26 - A second reason is introduced
Line 33 - A third reason is introduced
Line 41 - A limitation is introduced on the third reason
Line 44 - A fourth reason is introduced
Lines 48-50 - A limitation on the fourth reason is introduced
Meta-Structure:
List of Reasons - This passage heavily relies on working through a list of different reasons that a certain strategy works. When such a list dominates a passage, it's important to know what the list is of, where each element on it starts, and what each element generally says.
Last Thoughts:
The limitations placed on certain reasons presented in the list will definitely feature in some questions, and we should be sure that those limitations are reflected in any big-picture question, such as the Main Point question.
Question prompt
The author's characterization of
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: E
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Legal
Answer choices
-
Ainformal surveys of lawyers' Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. (Line 13) The passage does cite simulated trial situations, but it doesn't cite surveys of lawyers' clients. -
Bstatistical surveys of lawyers Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. Neither of these are mentioned as being the basis for the argument in the passage. -
Crecords of judges' decisions Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. (Line 13) The passage does discuss the use of simulated courtroom situations, but it doesn't discuss records of judges' decisions. And, in fact, judges aren't really in the passage at all—it mentions clients, lawyers, and jurors. -
Dinformal observations of nontrial Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. (Line 22; Line 29) The techniques similar to stealing thunder were the focus of the psychological research, but there's no indication that that research was informal. -
Eresearch that was not Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E matches the stem
Correct. Question Type:
Must Be True
Strategy Overview:
Find the section where the type of evidence supporting the Author's view is noted, and then review what it says
Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
This question asks about the support for the Author's argument about stealing thunder, and we know that types of evidence are important on the exam. Thus, we should have noted where it showed up, and so it should be easy to find it at the beginning of Paragraph 2.
There, we can see that "no empirical research" has been directed at studying stealing thunder (Lines 11-12), but studies of simulated trials have been done (Line 13), and it's supported by "several psychological explanations" (lines 18-19), which are themselves shown to be based on psychological research (ex., Lines 22 and 29), even if not directed specifically at the idea of stealing thunder.
With this in mind, let's find an answer that lines up with these details.
Answer Explanation:
(Lines 18-19; Line 22; Line 29; Line 13) The passage discusses psychological studies that are analogous to stealing thunder but not stealing thunder itself, so that justifies the first half of this answer. And, as noted in several other answer choices, simulated trial situations are mentioned directly in the passage. Both parts of this answer show up in the passage, so this is the correct answer.
Key Takeaway:
The source of support for an argument is always important, so it's key to note it. For two reasons. First, it'll help you find the specific information backing up the correct answer. Second, knowing that had certain evidence been mentioned you'd have noted it will give you the confidence to eliminate answers that bring up evidence you didn't note—and that will greatly speed up your time. For example, knowing that you didn't note any informal surveys of lawyers' clients would let you eliminate (A) without needing to scan the whole passage to see if they show up.
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
Deeper help
Ask follow-ups on any step
Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.
Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.
Discussion
-
question 1 reply
Started by Ceci