Evaluate Evidence Adequacy - MCAT CARS
Card 1 of 25
What is the key question to test relevance when evaluating evidence adequacy?
What is the key question to test relevance when evaluating evidence adequacy?
Tap to reveal answer
Does this evidence directly bear on the specific claim at issue. Relevance testing confirms evidence addresses the precise claim rather than tangential issues.
Does this evidence directly bear on the specific claim at issue. Relevance testing confirms evidence addresses the precise claim rather than tangential issues.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Which evidence is more adequate for causation: a controlled comparison or a single observed association?
Which evidence is more adequate for causation: a controlled comparison or a single observed association?
Tap to reveal answer
A controlled comparison that addresses confounders. Controlled designs better isolate causes by minimizing confounders, strengthening causal evidence.
A controlled comparison that addresses confounders. Controlled designs better isolate causes by minimizing confounders, strengthening causal evidence.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What does it mean for evidence to be adequate to support an argument’s conclusion?
What does it mean for evidence to be adequate to support an argument’s conclusion?
Tap to reveal answer
It is relevant, sufficient, and logically supports the conclusion. Adequacy ensures evidence directly pertains to the claim, provides enough support, and logically justifies the conclusion without gaps.
It is relevant, sufficient, and logically supports the conclusion. Adequacy ensures evidence directly pertains to the claim, provides enough support, and logically justifies the conclusion without gaps.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the key question to test sufficiency when evaluating evidence adequacy?
What is the key question to test sufficiency when evaluating evidence adequacy?
Tap to reveal answer
Is there enough evidence to justify the conclusion to the needed degree. Sufficiency assessment verifies evidence meets the threshold needed to reasonably support the conclusion's strength.
Is there enough evidence to justify the conclusion to the needed degree. Sufficiency assessment verifies evidence meets the threshold needed to reasonably support the conclusion's strength.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the key question to test representativeness of evidence?
What is the key question to test representativeness of evidence?
Tap to reveal answer
Does the evidence reflect the broader population or typical cases. Representativeness checks ensure evidence reflects the full population, avoiding bias in generalizations.
Does the evidence reflect the broader population or typical cases. Representativeness checks ensure evidence reflects the full population, avoiding bias in generalizations.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is a common sign that evidence is anecdotal rather than adequate?
What is a common sign that evidence is anecdotal rather than adequate?
Tap to reveal answer
It relies on one or a few personal cases as proof of a general claim. Anecdotal evidence lacks breadth and representativeness, failing to support broader claims adequately.
It relies on one or a few personal cases as proof of a general claim. Anecdotal evidence lacks breadth and representativeness, failing to support broader claims adequately.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when an argument uses a small sample to generalize broadly?
What is the main flaw when an argument uses a small sample to generalize broadly?
Tap to reveal answer
Hasty generalization from an insufficient sample. Small samples do not provide sufficient data to justify broad generalizations, leading to unreliable conclusions.
Hasty generalization from an insufficient sample. Small samples do not provide sufficient data to justify broad generalizations, leading to unreliable conclusions.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when evidence is drawn only from an unrepresentative subgroup?
What is the main flaw when evidence is drawn only from an unrepresentative subgroup?
Tap to reveal answer
Sampling bias (unrepresentative sample). Unrepresentative subgroups skew results, preventing accurate extrapolation to the larger population.
Sampling bias (unrepresentative sample). Unrepresentative subgroups skew results, preventing accurate extrapolation to the larger population.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when only supportive evidence is presented and contrary evidence is ignored?
What is the main flaw when only supportive evidence is presented and contrary evidence is ignored?
Tap to reveal answer
Cherry-picking (selective evidence). Selective presentation distorts the full picture by omitting contradictory data, undermining adequacy.
Cherry-picking (selective evidence). Selective presentation distorts the full picture by omitting contradictory data, undermining adequacy.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when the conclusion is stronger than what the evidence can justify?
What is the main flaw when the conclusion is stronger than what the evidence can justify?
Tap to reveal answer
Overgeneralization or overstatement of the conclusion. Conclusions exceeding evidence scope commit overgeneralization, as support is limited to narrower claims.
Overgeneralization or overstatement of the conclusion. Conclusions exceeding evidence scope commit overgeneralization, as support is limited to narrower claims.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when a correlation is treated as proof of causation?
What is the main flaw when a correlation is treated as proof of causation?
Tap to reveal answer
Causal fallacy (correlation does not establish causation). Correlation alone cannot prove causation due to potential confounders or alternative explanations.
Causal fallacy (correlation does not establish causation). Correlation alone cannot prove causation due to potential confounders or alternative explanations.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is a confounder in evaluating whether evidence supports a causal claim?
What is a confounder in evaluating whether evidence supports a causal claim?
Tap to reveal answer
A third variable that influences both the supposed cause and effect. Confounders undermine causal claims by offering alternative explanations for observed associations.
A third variable that influences both the supposed cause and effect. Confounders undermine causal claims by offering alternative explanations for observed associations.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when the evidence could be explained by an alternative cause not addressed?
What is the main flaw when the evidence could be explained by an alternative cause not addressed?
Tap to reveal answer
Failure to rule out plausible alternative explanations. Ignoring alternatives weakens evidence adequacy, as unaddressed causes could equally explain the data.
Failure to rule out plausible alternative explanations. Ignoring alternatives weakens evidence adequacy, as unaddressed causes could equally explain the data.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when a claim is supported by a source with a strong incentive to mislead?
What is the main flaw when a claim is supported by a source with a strong incentive to mislead?
Tap to reveal answer
Credibility problem due to conflict of interest or bias. Biased sources compromise reliability, as incentives may lead to distorted or incomplete evidence.
Credibility problem due to conflict of interest or bias. Biased sources compromise reliability, as incentives may lead to distorted or incomplete evidence.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when an argument treats an authority’s statement as decisive without support?
What is the main flaw when an argument treats an authority’s statement as decisive without support?
Tap to reveal answer
Unwarranted appeal to authority. Appeals to authority require independent verification, as expertise alone does not guarantee accuracy.
Unwarranted appeal to authority. Appeals to authority require independent verification, as expertise alone does not guarantee accuracy.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when evidence is outdated relative to the claim being made?
What is the main flaw when evidence is outdated relative to the claim being made?
Tap to reveal answer
Temporal mismatch; evidence lacks current applicability. Outdated evidence may not reflect current conditions, reducing its relevance and applicability.
Temporal mismatch; evidence lacks current applicability. Outdated evidence may not reflect current conditions, reducing its relevance and applicability.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
What is the main flaw when evidence is about one context but the conclusion is about a different context?
What is the main flaw when evidence is about one context but the conclusion is about a different context?
Tap to reveal answer
Contextual mismatch (external validity problem). Differences in context limit external validity, making evidence inadequate for claims in new settings.
Contextual mismatch (external validity problem). Differences in context limit external validity, making evidence inadequate for claims in new settings.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Identify the evidence flaw: “One student disliked the course, so the course is poorly taught.”
Identify the evidence flaw: “One student disliked the course, so the course is poorly taught.”
Tap to reveal answer
Anecdotal evidence causing a hasty generalization. A single case lacks representativeness, leading to overgeneralization about the course's quality.
Anecdotal evidence causing a hasty generalization. A single case lacks representativeness, leading to overgeneralization about the course's quality.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Identify the evidence flaw: “This diet worked for my friend; therefore it works for everyone.”
Identify the evidence flaw: “This diet worked for my friend; therefore it works for everyone.”
Tap to reveal answer
Hasty generalization from an unrepresentative anecdote. One personal success does not provide sufficient, representative data for universal efficacy claims.
Hasty generalization from an unrepresentative anecdote. One personal success does not provide sufficient, representative data for universal efficacy claims.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Identify the evidence flaw: “Study shows correlation; therefore the factor causes the outcome.”
Identify the evidence flaw: “Study shows correlation; therefore the factor causes the outcome.”
Tap to reveal answer
Causal inference from correlation without ruling out confounders. Mere correlation fails to establish causation without controlling for other influencing variables.
Causal inference from correlation without ruling out confounders. Mere correlation fails to establish causation without controlling for other influencing variables.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Identify the evidence flaw: “Only positive reviews are cited to prove the product is reliable.”
Identify the evidence flaw: “Only positive reviews are cited to prove the product is reliable.”
Tap to reveal answer
Cherry-picking; ignoring counterevidence. Selecting only favorable data ignores the full evidence base, biasing the reliability assessment.
Cherry-picking; ignoring counterevidence. Selecting only favorable data ignores the full evidence base, biasing the reliability assessment.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Identify the evidence flaw: “A survey of enthusiasts proves the general public supports the policy.”
Identify the evidence flaw: “A survey of enthusiasts proves the general public supports the policy.”
Tap to reveal answer
Sampling bias; the sample is not representative. Surveying a biased group distorts results, as it does not reflect the broader public's views.
Sampling bias; the sample is not representative. Surveying a biased group distorts results, as it does not reflect the broader public's views.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Identify the evidence flaw: “Because an expert said it, the claim is true, no data needed.”
Identify the evidence flaw: “Because an expert said it, the claim is true, no data needed.”
Tap to reveal answer
Unwarranted appeal to authority as sufficient evidence. Relying solely on authority bypasses the need for empirical data to substantiate the claim.
Unwarranted appeal to authority as sufficient evidence. Relying solely on authority bypasses the need for empirical data to substantiate the claim.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Identify the evidence flaw: “The program helped in one city; therefore it will work everywhere.”
Identify the evidence flaw: “The program helped in one city; therefore it will work everywhere.”
Tap to reveal answer
Contextual mismatch; overextending beyond the evidence. Success in one context does not ensure applicability elsewhere due to varying conditions.
Contextual mismatch; overextending beyond the evidence. Success in one context does not ensure applicability elsewhere due to varying conditions.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →
Which evidence is more adequate for a broad claim: one case report or multiple representative studies?
Which evidence is more adequate for a broad claim: one case report or multiple representative studies?
Tap to reveal answer
Multiple representative studies. Multiple studies offer greater representativeness and reliability for supporting broad generalizations.
Multiple representative studies. Multiple studies offer greater representativeness and reliability for supporting broad generalizations.
← Didn't Know|Knew It →