Riley is researching how social media affects sleep in teens. She writes two possible research questions:
Question 1: "How does using a phone in the hour before bedtime affect total sleep time for 12–14-year-olds?"
Question 2: "How has technology changed the world?"
She has 2 weeks and needs to use 3–5 sources and write an evidence-based answer. Which statement best compares the questions?
- Question 2 is better because its wide scope covers many topics and gives Riley more freedom to explore whatever sources she happens to find.
- Question 1 is better because it is specific and researchable, and it directly guides which sources Riley should find. (correct answer)
- Both questions work equally well because each one can be answered with 3–5 sources within a two-week timeframe.
- Question 2 is better because a broad topic makes it easier to reach a clear evidence-based answer than a narrow one does.
Explanation: The best answer is that Question 1 is stronger because it is specific and researchable and points Riley toward the sources she needs. It names a behavior (phone use), a time (the hour before bed), an outcome (total sleep time), and an age group (12–14-year-olds). With only two weeks and 3–5 sources, those clear limits tell her exactly what to look for. The choice praising Question 2's wide scope has it backwards: too much freedom means no focus, and Riley could never cover 'how technology changed the world' with just a few sources. The choice saying both questions work equally well ignores that a huge topic cannot actually be answered well in two weeks with 3–5 sources—the size of the task matters, not just the number of sources. The choice claiming a broad topic makes a clear answer easier is also wrong: broad topics scatter your evidence, while a narrow, measurable question makes a focused evidence-based answer possible.