Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the recommendation in Text 1?

Question

Text 1
A trial found that a daily thirty-minute walk improved participants' sleep quality by an average of twenty percent. The authors describe the effect as robust and recommend walking as a first-line treatment for mild insomnia.

Text 2
Participants in the walking trial knew which group they had been assigned to, and sleep quality was self-reported. Until a study measures sleep objectively in participants who don't know their group, the twenty percent figure should be treated as promising rather than established.

Accepted Answer

A. By arguing that it is premature, since the trial's design leaves the true size of the effect uncertain.. Text 2 identifies two weaknesses in the trial and concludes the figure is 'promising rather than established'. A treatment recommendation built on that figure would, by Text 2's logic, be ahead of the evidence.

Answer

B. By agreeing that walking should be the first treatment offered for mild insomnia. — Text 2 stops short of endorsing anything; it calls for better evidence first.

Answer

C. By denying that walking has any effect on sleep. — Text 2 calls the result 'promising' — it doesn't deny an effect, only its certainty.

Answer

D. By claiming that the twenty percent figure understates the benefit. — Text 2 questions whether the figure is reliable, not whether it is too small.

Craft and Structure practice question

Answer: A. By arguing that it is premature, since the trial's design leaves the true size of the effect uncertain.

Why the other answers are wrong

More Craft and Structure questions