Reading comp PrepTest 153 · Section 1 · Question 15

Passage

 Criminal courts frequently rely on accomplice witnesses (witnesses who testify regarding the role of an alleged co-conspirator in a crime) Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Legal Studies

Paragraph 1
  • Paragraph note
    • A phenomenon is introduced
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Prosecutors use co-conspirator and jailhouse informant testimony
    • This includes supposed confessions
Paragraph 2
  • Paragraph note
    • A problem is noted
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Motive - These witnesses are promised something for their testimony, so they're motivated to lie
    • Study - They're rarely punished for lying
Paragraph 3
  • Paragraph note
    • A debate over the prior paragraph is explored
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Courts - Safeguards prevent lies from creating problems - e.g., cross-examination to ask about motives
    • Author - They don't always work, like when a prosecutor hints at instead of promising something
Paragraph 4
  • Paragraph note
    • More problems with allowing this testimony are highlighted
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Research - Juries give weight to confessions, even when based on an incentive
    • Similar to situation with cooperating witnesses
Paragraph 5
  • Paragraph note
    • An explanation is given for the jurors behavior in prior paragraph
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Psychological explanation - People explain actions of others by their character, not external factors
    • Study - Person who confessed was guilty, even if threatened or promised a reward for doing so
    • Similar to situation with cooperating witnesses
Main Point:
There are many problems with the use of co-conspirator and jailhouse informant testimony, and the safeguards in place aren't enough to prevent false testimony from sending someone to jail because of a psychological phenomenon affecting jurors.

Key Lines:
Lines 6-10 - The phenomenon debated is introduced
Lines 13-16 - The problem is introduced
Lines 20-23 - The opposing point (Courts) is introduced
Lines 25-26 - The Author's opinion is introduced
Lines 29-31 - The first specific problem
Lines 35-37 - The second specific problem
Lines 47-49 - A potential explanation for the problem is given

Meta-Structure:
Debate over Problem. Normally, we'd see a Problem/Solution passage, with the debate being over various solutions to a problem. Here, however, a problem is introduced, and while there is a "solution" raised (the safeguards such as cross-examination), it's given very little space in the passage. Rather, the Author spends most of the time highlighting why the problem is, well, a problem, and explains some underlying psychology.

Last Thoughts:
On top of everything said before about the exploration of a problem, it will likely be important that we note the comparisons/analogies on which much of the Author's argument relies. Paragraph 4 and 5 both talk about research to a similar situation, rather than the direct topic at hand.

The topic is about potentially false co-conspirator or jailhouse informant testimony. The research in Paragraph 4 deals with confessions from the defendants to investigators based on incentives. The studies in Paragraph 5 build on this, talking about confessions that were either based on threats or promises of leniency. In both cases, the study is on a direct confession by a defendant, not on testimony that the defendant confessed to an informant or a co-conspirator. The similarity here is that the juries are weighing this evidence, and the explanation for how they process it is based on a psychological tendency to blame people's character rather than their situation.

Question prompt

Which one of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Legal

Answer choices

  1. A
    Evidence obtained through coercion, Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 49-56; Line 26) The specific section of the passage that mirrors this language shows up in Lines 49-56, but that highlights the special weight that jurors give to such testimony, not the truthfulness of it. This answer is also stronger than the Author's opinion, which, in Line 26, says that the safeguards in place ""do not always"" protect defendants against false testimony.
  2. B
    Numerous considerations suggest that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    Correct. Question Type:
    Main Point

    Strategy Overview:
    Reiterate the main point that we stated after reading through the passage

    Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
    The passage dealt with a legal practice—promising better treatment to co-conspirators or jailhouse informants—in exchange for their testimony, usually in the form of a confession from someone else on trial (Lines 6-10).

    The Author notes that this provides an incentive to lie (Lines 13-15). The Courts argue that there are safeguards to protect a lie from leading to a conviction (Lines 20-23), but the Author isn't buying it (25-26). She then goes on to explain why these safeguards are unlikely to work, citing specific research (Line 35; Line 47), showing that a psychological phenomenon can explain why jurors weigh this evidence incorrectly.

    Summing that all up, we ended up with:

    There are many problems with the use of co-conspirator and jailhouse informant testimony, and the safeguards in place aren't enough to prevent false testimony from sending someone to jail because of a psychological phenomenon affecting jurors.

    Answer Explanation:
    (Lines 13-15; Lines 25-26) The Author states that there is an incentive to lie for this type of testimony, and that the safeguards in place aren't enough to protect defendants. She then goes into two and a half paragraphs of explanation for why that's the case. This answer reflects the entirety of the passage, the Author's view—and it even matches her strength (""do not always"" matching up with ""may""). It is therefore the correct answer.

    Key Takeaway:
    Be sure that the answer you pick to a Main Point question in RC reflects the strength/certainty of the Author's argument! Focusing there is generally a good way to eliminate a couple answers.
  3. C
    Studies show that jurors Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 35-37; Lines 47-49) This answer reflects the Author's point from Paragraphs 4 and 5, but the evidence raised there—direct confession—is used to support a point about co-conspirator and jailhouse informant testimony. This answer highlights the analogous situation to the main point, not the main topic of the passage.
  4. D
    Traditional legal arguments offered Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 23-26) This is a tempting answer! However, there are a couple issues. The first is that we don't get the legal arguments for allowing this testimony. The closest is the Courts stating that there are safeguards in place to protect defendants from false testimony—but that's a reason not to ban it, not a reason to allow it. Second, the Author claims that this testimony sometimes results in a bad conviction (""do not always provide protection""), and this answer overshoots that a bit by stating that the studies show the assumptions underlying it are false. If the arguments in favor of it are based on false assumptions, then there's more evidence than supporting just that people sometimes aren't protected from false testimony.
  5. E
    There is substantial evidence Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 13-16) This is another tempting answer! However, there are a couple of issues. First, the Author doesn't actually offer evidence that such testimony is influenced by these incentives—it seems to be relying on common sense that if there's an incentive and little downside, then people will do it because of that incentive. Second, this answer doesn't speak to any of the studies or research done, as that was about the influence on jurors, not on the informants.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 5%
  2. B Credited 47%
  3. C 15%
  4. D 19%
  5. E 15%

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

View all discussions Start a discussion