Skip to main contentSkip to solution

The passage given below is followed by four alternate summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the passage.

For years, movies and television series like Crime Scene Investigation (CSI) paint an unrealistic picture of the "science of voices." In the 1994 movie Clear and Present Danger an expert listens to a brief recorded utterance and declares that the speaker is "Cuban, aged 35 to 45, educated in the eastern United States." The recording is then fed to a supercomputer that matches the voice to that of a suspect, concluding that the probability of correct identification is 90%. This sequence sums up a good number of misimpressions about forensic phonetics, which have led to errors in real-life justice. Indeed, that movie scene exemplifies the so-called "CSI effect" the phenomenon in which judges hold unrealistic expectations of the capabilities of forensic science.

Solution

βœ… Correct Option: 1

The passage criticizes how movies and TV shows create unrealistic expectations about voice forensics. The key is connecting media influence -> unrealistic beliefs -> problems in real justice.

From passage: "movies and television series like Crime Scene Investigation (CSI) paint an unrealistic picture of the 'science of voices'... which have led to errors in real-life justice"

Thought Process:

Movies show voice analysis as super accurate -> judges believe this is real -> they expect too much from actual voice evidence -> this causes justice system problems

The passage structure: Media portrayal -> unrealistic expectations -> real-world consequences


🟒 Option 1 -> correct -> captures both the media influence AND the unrealistic belief that forensic phonetics is "robust and fool proof" - exactly what the passage argues against

πŸ”΄ Option 2 -> tone-error -> sounds positive about voice recognition working in real life, but the passage warns it creates unrealistic expectations and causes errors in justice

🟠 Option 3 -> partial-truth -> mentions movies/TV influence but misses the key point that these expectations are unrealistic - just says voice recognition "features prominently" without the criticism

🟠 Option 4 -> scope-error -> talks about shaky scientific basis (true) but completely ignores the movies/TV influence which is the main focus of the passage

The confusion here is between options 1 and 4 - both mention problems with voice forensics. But option 4 misses the media influence angle that drives the entire passage.

Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Left arrow: Previous question
  • Right arrow: Next question
  • S key: Jump to solution
  • Q key: Jump to question