Why do some trial court judges oppose conducting independent research

Question

Passage A

Why do some trial court judges oppose conducting
independent research to help them make decisions?
One of their objections, is that it distorts the adversarial
system by requiring an active judicial role and
  (5)   undermining the importance of evidence presented
by the opposing parties. Another fear is that judges
lack the wherewithal to conduct first-rate research
and may wind up using outlier or discredited
scientific materials.

(10)   While these concerns have some merit, they do
not justify an absolute prohibition of the practice.
First, there are reasons to sacrifice adversarial values
in the scientific evidence context. The adversarial
system is particularly ill-suited to handling specialized
  (15)   knowledge. The two parties prescreen and compen-
sate expert witnesses, which virtually ensures conflicting
and partisan testimony. At the same time, scientific
facts are general truths not confined to the immediate
cases. Because scientific admissibility decisions can
  (20)   exert considerable influence over future cases,
erroneous decisions detract from the legitimacy of the
system. Independent research could help judges avoid
such errors.

Second, a trial provides a structure that guides
  (25)   any potential independent research, reducing the
possibility of a judge's reaching outlandish results.
Independent research supplements, rather than replaces,
the parties' presentation of the evidence, so
the parties always frame the debate.

Passage B

(30)   Regardless of what trial courts may do, appellate
courts should resist the temptation to conduct their
own independent research of scientific literature.

As a general rule, appellate courts do not hear
live testimony. Thus these courts lack some of the
  (35)   critical tools available at the trial level for arriving
at a determination of the facts: live testimony and
cross-examination. Experts practicing in the field may
have knowledge and experience beyond what is
reflected in the available scientific literature. And
  (40)   adverse parties can test the credibility and reliability
of proffered literature by subjecting the expert witness
to the greatest legal engine ever invented for the
discovery of truth—cross-examination. The trial judge
may even participate in the process by questioning
  (45)   live witnesses. However, these events can only occur
at the trial level.

Literature considered for the first time at the
appellate level is not subject to live comment by practicing
experts and cannot be tested in the crucible
  (50)   of the adversarial system. Thus one of the core
criticisms against the use of such sources by appellate
courts is that doing so usurps the trial court's fact-
finding function. Internet sources, in particular, have
come under criticism for their potential unreliability.

(55)   When an appellate court goes outside the record to
determine case facts, it ignores its function as a
court of review, and it substitutes its own questionable
research results for evidence that should have been
tested in the trial court. This criticism applies with
  (60)   full force to the use of outside-the-record texts and
treatises, regardless of the medium in which they
are found.    1 
 1. Which one of the following principles underlies the arguments in both passages?

(A) It is more appropriate for trial judges to conduct independent research than for appellate judges to do so.
(B) Judges should conduct independent research in order to determine what evidence parties to a trial should be allowed to present.
(C) Independent research by judges should not supersede evidence presented by the opposing parties in a trial.
(D) Judges' questioning of witnesses should be informed by the judges' own independent research.
(E) Both trial and appellate judges should conduct research based on standard, reliable sources.

2 
 2. It can be inferred that each author would agree that if judges conduct independent research, that research

(A) should be constrained by the structure of a trial
(B) is typically confined to standard, reliable sources
(C) replaces, rather than supplements, party-presented evidence
(D) should be conducted at the trial level but not at the appellate level
(E) usurps the trial court's fact-finding function

3 
 3. Which one of the following phrases is used by the author of passage B to express a concern that is most closely related to the concern expressed by the author of passage A using the phrase "lack the wherewithal" (line 7)?

(A) experience beyond what is reflected (lines 38-39)
(B) may even participate in the process (line 44)
(C) subject to live comment (line 48)
(D) questionable research results (lines 57-58)
(E) outside-the-record texts (line 60)

4 
 4. Given the statements about cross-examination in lines 39-43, the author of passage B would be most likely to take issue with which one, of the following claims by the author of passage A?

(A) An absolute prohibition of independent research by trial judges is not justified.
(B) The adversarial system is particularly ill-suited to handling specialized knowledge.
(C) Scientific admissibility decisions exert considerable influence over future cases.
(D) Erroneous decisions can be readily exposed by third parties.
(E) A trial provides a structure that guides any potential independent research.

5 
 5. Which one of the following words as used in passage B comes closest to having the same reference as the word "crucible" in line 49?

(A) temptation (line 31)
(B) credibility (line 40)
(C) engine (line 42)
(D) function (line 53)
(E) medium (line 61)

6 
 6. It can be inferred, based on their titles, that the relationship between which one of the following pairs of documents is most analogous to the relationship between passage A and passage B, respectively?

A.
"Negative Effects of Salt Consumption"
"Unhealthy Amounts of Salt in the Diet"

B.
"Salt Can Be Beneficial for Some People"
"People with High Blood Pressure Should Avoid Salt"

C.
"Debunking the Alleged Danger Posed by Salt"
"Inconclusive Research Results on the Health Effects of Salt Consumption"

D.
"Substitutes for Dietary Salt"
"Salt Substitutes Come Under Fire"

E.
"The Health Effects of Salt Consumption"
"Salt Deficiency in a Sample Population"

7 
 7. The stances of the authors of passage A and passage B, respectively, toward independent research on the part of trial judges are most accurately described as

(A) resigned acceptance and implicit disapproval
(B) cautious ambivalence and strict neutrality
(C) reasoned skepticism and veiled antipathy
(D) qualified approval and explicit noncommitment
(E) forceful advocacy and tentative opposition

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

1. Which one of the following principles underlies the arguments in both passages?

Explanation

The question is asking for a principle underlying both passages. The credited response will be consistent with the Bottom Line of both passages.

A. No.  Passage A does not discuss whether or not it is appropriate for appellate judges to conduct independent research.

B. No.  While passage A mentions that independent research can help trial judges avoid errors in scientific admissibility decisions, passage B does not discuss the admissibility of evidence.

C.  Yes.   Passage A states that independent research  “supplements rather than replaces”  evidence presented at trial, and passage B argues that independent research is unreliable at the appellate level because of the lack of live testimony and cross-examination that can occur only at the trial level.

D. No.  While passage B notes that judges can question live witnesses, it is discussed in a way to test the credibility and reliability of scientific literature. Passage A does not discuss judges’ questioning of witnesses.

E. No.  Passage B argues that appellate judges should not conduct research.

Answer: C

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

2. It can be inferred that each author would agree that if judges conduct independent research, that research

Explanation

The question is asking for a statement that both authors would agree with regarding research conducted independently by judges. The credited response will be the answer choice best supported by evidence in the passages.

A.  Yes.   Passage A argues this in its third paragraph, and passage B discusses that a trial provides critical tools for determining facts.

B. No.  Both passages note that judges may wind up using questionable sources.

C. No.  This is explicitly contradicted by the final paragraph of passage A.

D. No.  Passage A does not mention the appellate level.

E. No.  This is argued by passage B, but passage A is in favor of independent research to aid the trial court in factfinding.

Answer: A

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

3. Which one of the following phrases is used by the author of passage B to express a concern that is most closely related to the concern expressed by the author of passage A using the phrase "lack the wherewithal" (line 7)?

Explanation

The question is asking you to find the phrase in passage B that parallels how the author of passage A uses the quoted phrase. In passage A, the author is expressing concern that judges will wind up using outlier or discredited materials in their research. The credited response will be a phrase from passage B that is also used in the author’s expression of concern about the materials that judges might use in their independent research.

A. No.  This phrase is referring to an advantage of live testimony.

B. No.  This phrase is referring to the judge’s interaction with a live witness at trial.

C. No.  This phrase isn’t critiquing the content of the outside literature. Instead it states that the literature is not subject to cross-examination.

D.  Yes.   This phrase is referring to the potentially unreliable outside research materials that a judge might use.

E. No.  The critique is passage A is not that a source is external, but that it may be of poor quality. This phrase does not describe the quality of the material.

Answer: D

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

6. It can be inferred, based on their titles, that the relationship between which one of the following pairs of documents is most analogous to the relationship between passage A and passage B, respectively?

Explanation

The question is asking you to identify the relationship between passage A and passage B and then apply that same relationship to answer choices on topics unrelated to the passage. Passage A discusses reasons that independent research might be acceptable at the trial level, while passage B discusses why independent research is not acceptable at the appellate level. The credited response should reflect the idea that something is acceptable under one set of circumstances, but not acceptable under a different set of circumstances.

A. No.  Both of these titles view salt negatively.

B.  Yes.   The first title says salt is acceptable under one set of circumstances, but the second title indicates that salt is not acceptable under a different set of circumstances.

C. No.  While the first title seems to match with passage A, passage B takes a definitive stance rather than failing to draw a conclusion.

D. No.  Neither passage evaluates alternatives to independent research.

E. No.  Both of these titles seem to view salt positively.

Answer: B

gullyboy09 · Answer

Hi  Sajjad1994 , can you please help me with Q7? I am not able to infer "explicit non-commitment" part.

guddo · Answer

7. The stances of the authors of passage A and passage B, respectively, toward independent research on the part of trial judges are most accurately described as

Passage A gives  qualified approval : it admits the objections have some merit, but says they do not justify a complete ban. Passage B does not take a clear position on trial judges; it says appellate courts should not do this, “regardless of what trial courts may do,” so it shows explicit noncommitment on that issue.

(A) resigned acceptance and implicit disapproval

Passage A is not resigned. It actively argues that independent research can help trial judges avoid errors. Passage B is not merely implicit about its own view; it is explicit only about appellate courts, not trial judges.

(B) cautious ambivalence and strict neutrality

Passage A is not ambivalent. It clearly supports allowing the practice, though with limits. Passage B is not strictly neutral in tone overall; it strongly opposes appellate-court research, while simply not committing on trial judges.

(C) reasoned skepticism and veiled antipathy

Passage A is not skeptical overall. It ultimately supports the practice for trial judges. Passage B does not show veiled antipathy toward trial judges’ doing it.

(D) qualified approval and explicit noncommitment

This is best. Passage A approves, but with qualifications. Passage B explicitly avoids taking a position on trial judges by saying “regardless of what trial courts may do.”

(E) forceful advocacy and tentative opposition

Passage A is not forceful advocacy; it is more measured than that. Passage B is not tentatively opposed to trial judges’ doing it; it simply does not commit.

Answer: (D)

Why do some trial court judges oppose conducting independent research

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Why do some trial court judges oppose conducting independent research

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards