Determine how one author would respond to or evaluate the other's claim.
Predict each author's response by following the reasoning already in the text.
Core Idea
Use one author's stated reasoning to predict what they would say about the other author's argument — stay within what the text actually supports.
Understanding
These questions ask you to step into one author's shoes: given what they've argued, how would they react to the other text? The key is that your answer must be grounded in the text, not in what seems like a reasonable opinion.
Start by identifying the second author's core reasoning or evidence. Then look at the first author's claim and ask: does the second author's logic support it, undermine it, or address a different aspect entirely?
A common trap is choosing an answer that sounds like a smart response but isn't actually supported by anything in the passage. If the text doesn't give you evidence for a particular reaction, that answer is wrong — no matter how logical it seems.
Worked Example
Text 1:
The Industrial Revolution began in Britain primarily because of its patent system, which guaranteed inventors exclusive rights to profit from their creations. This legal framework incentivized risk-taking and innovation in ways that no other country's system did at the time.
Text 2:
Britain's early industrialization owed more to its abundant coal deposits and navigable waterways than to any institutional advantage. Several European countries had comparable legal protections for inventors, yet none industrialized as quickly — suggesting that geographic and resource advantages were decisive.
How would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the claim made in Text 1?
Select an answer to see the explanation