DISCUSSION: See lines 50-59 for a full discussion of this cognitive framework. Basically, at the start of a trial jurors have zero information. They want context that will let them interpret the facts they hear. The first lawyer to present information has a chance to frame how jurors view that information and all later testimony.
So stealing thunder can help present a positive mental model for jurors, as you have the chance to frame how they view the information. But if the information is too negative, then early exposure may backfire, as jurors will form a negative mental model.
So “cognitive framework” just refers to the initial information that will let jurors decide how to interpret later facts.
- CORRECT. Lines 50-54 say this directly. If you present information early on, with a positive frame, this will affect how jurors interpret later information.
- This isn’t what lines 50-59 say. This answer is true in real life, but you’re not looking for something that’s true. You’re looking for something that answers the question asked.
- The amount of impact isn’t the key. The point of the cognitive framework is that if you frame damaging evidence positively, the information may even have a positive impact. There’s a lot of power in being able to create a mental framework for jurors to use.
- This contradicts lines 50-59. In cases where information is too negative, stealing thunder should either be done very late or not at all. Overly negative information early on can bias the jury against you.
- This doesn’t match the passage. The author never compared creating credibility vs. positive framing. Credibility was only mentioned on line 21, it had nothing to do with the cognitive framework on lines 50-59.
Need help with RC? → Try the RC Mastery Seminar
Solve hard passages quickly