DISCUSSION: Lawyers’ attitudes are only mentioned in lines 6-10. Lawyers think that, if information is likely to be revealed by the opposition, then lawyers should instead reveal it themselves.
If negative information isn’t likely to be revealed, then there’s no point to bringing it up.
Since this is literally the only thing we know about lawyer’s opinions on when to steal thunder, it has to be the right answer.
- This is something the author believes, based on lines 50-59. But the passage never said lawyers think this. Lawyers’ opinions are only given on lines 6-10.
- This is never mentioned, and also vague. This says “some” of the facts. That’s a very low bar. If jurors know the name of the accused, then they technically know “some” of the facts. That’s a pretty useless basis upon which to decide whether to steal thunder.
This answer does not say that a decision to steal thunder should depend on whether jurors already know the negative fact in question, which may have been how you interpreted it. That could have been the right answer, but that’s not what this answer says.
- This is simply never mentioned in the passage.
- CORRECT. See the analysis above.
- The question asks what lawyers believe. This can’t be the right answer, because we don’t know what lawyers think about psychological studies. Only the author mentions psychological studies.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions