Interpreting Graphs - PSAT Critical Reading
Card 0 of 8
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
According to the graph, when the focus of the question was on their own actions, scientists
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
According to the graph, when the focus of the question was on their own actions, scientists
Tap to see back →
The key to any graph-based question is to make sure to look not just at the graph itself, but also at any additional information that is presented with the graph. In this case, you are told that the bars on the left represent how the scientists would view others' future work if the other person admitted to wrongdoing. Notice that if the other person admitted that they had been wrong that the people surveyed would be less likely to suspect them than if they didn't admit to wrongdoing. In contrast, the bars on the right show how they would anticipate others to react if they admitted to wrongdoing. In this case, they said that others would be more suspicious of their work if they did admit to wrongdoing than if they didn't. The answer that matches this is "incorrectly assumed that admitting that a study was wrong would lead others to be more suspicious of their work". While they assumed that others would be more suspicious of their work if they admitted to wrongdoing, scientists, in general, were less suspicious of individuals who admitted to wrongdoing.
The key to any graph-based question is to make sure to look not just at the graph itself, but also at any additional information that is presented with the graph. In this case, you are told that the bars on the left represent how the scientists would view others' future work if the other person admitted to wrongdoing. Notice that if the other person admitted that they had been wrong that the people surveyed would be less likely to suspect them than if they didn't admit to wrongdoing. In contrast, the bars on the right show how they would anticipate others to react if they admitted to wrongdoing. In this case, they said that others would be more suspicious of their work if they did admit to wrongdoing than if they didn't. The answer that matches this is "incorrectly assumed that admitting that a study was wrong would lead others to be more suspicious of their work". While they assumed that others would be more suspicious of their work if they admitted to wrongdoing, scientists, in general, were less suspicious of individuals who admitted to wrongdoing.
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
Which of the following is best supported by the graph?
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
Which of the following is best supported by the graph?
Tap to see back →
Scientists viewed others who admitted to wrongdoing with less suspicion than they viewed people who did not admit to wrongdoing. However, scientists believed that others would view them as less trustworthy if they admitted to wrongdoing. This matches "scientists believed that others would view them as much less honest if they admitted to wrongness."
The other choices can all be eliminated because they make the claim that there is some sort of relationship that can be drawn between scientists in one group and the other. Because you don't have scientist- by-scientist data, however, you can't make any conclusions linking individual scientists in each survey group.
Scientists viewed others who admitted to wrongdoing with less suspicion than they viewed people who did not admit to wrongdoing. However, scientists believed that others would view them as less trustworthy if they admitted to wrongdoing. This matches "scientists believed that others would view them as much less honest if they admitted to wrongness."
The other choices can all be eliminated because they make the claim that there is some sort of relationship that can be drawn between scientists in one group and the other. Because you don't have scientist- by-scientist data, however, you can't make any conclusions linking individual scientists in each survey group.
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
According to the graph, when the focus of the question was on their own actions, scientists
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
According to the graph, when the focus of the question was on their own actions, scientists
Tap to see back →
The key to any graph-based question is to make sure to look not just at the graph itself, but also at any additional information that is presented with the graph. In this case, you are told that the bars on the left represent how the scientists would view others' future work if the other person admitted to wrongdoing. Notice that if the other person admitted that they had been wrong that the people surveyed would be less likely to suspect them than if they didn't admit to wrongdoing. In contrast, the bars on the right show how they would anticipate others to react if they admitted to wrongdoing. In this case, they said that others would be more suspicious of their work if they did admit to wrongdoing than if they didn't. The answer that matches this is "incorrectly assumed that admitting that a study was wrong would lead others to be more suspicious of their work". While they assumed that others would be more suspicious of their work if they admitted to wrongdoing, scientists, in general, were less suspicious of individuals who admitted to wrongdoing.
The key to any graph-based question is to make sure to look not just at the graph itself, but also at any additional information that is presented with the graph. In this case, you are told that the bars on the left represent how the scientists would view others' future work if the other person admitted to wrongdoing. Notice that if the other person admitted that they had been wrong that the people surveyed would be less likely to suspect them than if they didn't admit to wrongdoing. In contrast, the bars on the right show how they would anticipate others to react if they admitted to wrongdoing. In this case, they said that others would be more suspicious of their work if they did admit to wrongdoing than if they didn't. The answer that matches this is "incorrectly assumed that admitting that a study was wrong would lead others to be more suspicious of their work". While they assumed that others would be more suspicious of their work if they admitted to wrongdoing, scientists, in general, were less suspicious of individuals who admitted to wrongdoing.
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
Which of the following is best supported by the graph?
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
Which of the following is best supported by the graph?
Tap to see back →
Scientists viewed others who admitted to wrongdoing with less suspicion than they viewed people who did not admit to wrongdoing. However, scientists believed that others would view them as less trustworthy if they admitted to wrongdoing. This matches "scientists believed that others would view them as much less honest if they admitted to wrongness."
The other choices can all be eliminated because they make the claim that there is some sort of relationship that can be drawn between scientists in one group and the other. Because you don't have scientist- by-scientist data, however, you can't make any conclusions linking individual scientists in each survey group.
Scientists viewed others who admitted to wrongdoing with less suspicion than they viewed people who did not admit to wrongdoing. However, scientists believed that others would view them as less trustworthy if they admitted to wrongdoing. This matches "scientists believed that others would view them as much less honest if they admitted to wrongness."
The other choices can all be eliminated because they make the claim that there is some sort of relationship that can be drawn between scientists in one group and the other. Because you don't have scientist- by-scientist data, however, you can't make any conclusions linking individual scientists in each survey group.
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
According to the graph, when the focus of the question was on their own actions, scientists
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
According to the graph, when the focus of the question was on their own actions, scientists
Tap to see back →
The key to any graph-based question is to make sure to look not just at the graph itself, but also at any additional information that is presented with the graph. In this case, you are told that the bars on the left represent how the scientists would view others' future work if the other person admitted to wrongdoing. Notice that if the other person admitted that they had been wrong that the people surveyed would be less likely to suspect them than if they didn't admit to wrongdoing. In contrast, the bars on the right show how they would anticipate others to react if they admitted to wrongdoing. In this case, they said that others would be more suspicious of their work if they did admit to wrongdoing than if they didn't. The answer that matches this is "incorrectly assumed that admitting that a study was wrong would lead others to be more suspicious of their work". While they assumed that others would be more suspicious of their work if they admitted to wrongdoing, scientists, in general, were less suspicious of individuals who admitted to wrongdoing.
The key to any graph-based question is to make sure to look not just at the graph itself, but also at any additional information that is presented with the graph. In this case, you are told that the bars on the left represent how the scientists would view others' future work if the other person admitted to wrongdoing. Notice that if the other person admitted that they had been wrong that the people surveyed would be less likely to suspect them than if they didn't admit to wrongdoing. In contrast, the bars on the right show how they would anticipate others to react if they admitted to wrongdoing. In this case, they said that others would be more suspicious of their work if they did admit to wrongdoing than if they didn't. The answer that matches this is "incorrectly assumed that admitting that a study was wrong would lead others to be more suspicious of their work". While they assumed that others would be more suspicious of their work if they admitted to wrongdoing, scientists, in general, were less suspicious of individuals who admitted to wrongdoing.
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
Which of the following is best supported by the graph?
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
Which of the following is best supported by the graph?
Tap to see back →
Scientists viewed others who admitted to wrongdoing with less suspicion than they viewed people who did not admit to wrongdoing. However, scientists believed that others would view them as less trustworthy if they admitted to wrongdoing. This matches "scientists believed that others would view them as much less honest if they admitted to wrongness."
The other choices can all be eliminated because they make the claim that there is some sort of relationship that can be drawn between scientists in one group and the other. Because you don't have scientist- by-scientist data, however, you can't make any conclusions linking individual scientists in each survey group.
Scientists viewed others who admitted to wrongdoing with less suspicion than they viewed people who did not admit to wrongdoing. However, scientists believed that others would view them as less trustworthy if they admitted to wrongdoing. This matches "scientists believed that others would view them as much less honest if they admitted to wrongness."
The other choices can all be eliminated because they make the claim that there is some sort of relationship that can be drawn between scientists in one group and the other. Because you don't have scientist- by-scientist data, however, you can't make any conclusions linking individual scientists in each survey group.
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
According to the graph, when the focus of the question was on their own actions, scientists
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
According to the graph, when the focus of the question was on their own actions, scientists
Tap to see back →
The key to any graph-based question is to make sure to look not just at the graph itself, but also at any additional information that is presented with the graph. In this case, you are told that the bars on the left represent how the scientists would view others' future work if the other person admitted to wrongdoing. Notice that if the other person admitted that they had been wrong that the people surveyed would be less likely to suspect them than if they didn't admit to wrongdoing. In contrast, the bars on the right show how they would anticipate others to react if they admitted to wrongdoing. In this case, they said that others would be more suspicious of their work if they did admit to wrongdoing than if they didn't. The answer that matches this is "incorrectly assumed that admitting that a study was wrong would lead others to be more suspicious of their work". While they assumed that others would be more suspicious of their work if they admitted to wrongdoing, scientists, in general, were less suspicious of individuals who admitted to wrongdoing.
The key to any graph-based question is to make sure to look not just at the graph itself, but also at any additional information that is presented with the graph. In this case, you are told that the bars on the left represent how the scientists would view others' future work if the other person admitted to wrongdoing. Notice that if the other person admitted that they had been wrong that the people surveyed would be less likely to suspect them than if they didn't admit to wrongdoing. In contrast, the bars on the right show how they would anticipate others to react if they admitted to wrongdoing. In this case, they said that others would be more suspicious of their work if they did admit to wrongdoing than if they didn't. The answer that matches this is "incorrectly assumed that admitting that a study was wrong would lead others to be more suspicious of their work". While they assumed that others would be more suspicious of their work if they admitted to wrongdoing, scientists, in general, were less suspicious of individuals who admitted to wrongdoing.
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
Which of the following is best supported by the graph?
The chart below maps how scientists view others' work (left) and how they suspect others will view their own work (right) if the researcher (the scientist or another, depending on the focus) admitted to engaging in questionable research practices.
Adapted from Fetterman & Sassenberg, "The Reputational Consequences of Failed Replications and Wrongness Admission among Scientists." December 9, 2015, PLOS One.
Which of the following is best supported by the graph?
Tap to see back →
Scientists viewed others who admitted to wrongdoing with less suspicion than they viewed people who did not admit to wrongdoing. However, scientists believed that others would view them as less trustworthy if they admitted to wrongdoing. This matches "scientists believed that others would view them as much less honest if they admitted to wrongness."
The other choices can all be eliminated because they make the claim that there is some sort of relationship that can be drawn between scientists in one group and the other. Because you don't have scientist- by-scientist data, however, you can't make any conclusions linking individual scientists in each survey group.
Scientists viewed others who admitted to wrongdoing with less suspicion than they viewed people who did not admit to wrongdoing. However, scientists believed that others would view them as less trustworthy if they admitted to wrongdoing. This matches "scientists believed that others would view them as much less honest if they admitted to wrongness."
The other choices can all be eliminated because they make the claim that there is some sort of relationship that can be drawn between scientists in one group and the other. Because you don't have scientist- by-scientist data, however, you can't make any conclusions linking individual scientists in each survey group.