Two-Part Analysis - Verbal
As investigators comb a crime scene, they collect evidence to take back to the lab to analyze in hopes of identifying a suspect. Initially, fingerprints as well as DNA were filed away, which allowed for the creation of an automated nationwide searchable database. Today, modern technology has increased the accuracy of tracking criminals with state-of-the-art facial recognition software capable of analyzing facial detail including iris recognition. Not only have biometrical advancements improved the accuracy rate, but they have also decreased the response time necessary to identify a match. The development of biometric technologies has enhanced the ability to identify criminals more effectively, thereby increasing the conviction rate and exonerating the innocent.
Select Strengthen for the statement that would, if true, most strengthen the argument, and select Weaken for the statement that would, if true, most weaken the argument. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Nicely done!
[[snippet]]A 7 percentage point increase in accuracy when using biometric technologies would certainly strengthen the argument's conclusion.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice lacks a comparison. You do not know if 4 percent is higher or lower than the false conviction rate prior to the invention of modern biometric technologies. Therefore, it is impossible to determine whether it strengthens or weakens the argument.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This statement regarding access to the nationwide database would have no effect on the argument's conclusion, since it is typically high-level investigators who would be working on convicting criminals and exonerating the innocent.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]How criminals respond to the new biometric technologies does not strengthen the argument that these technologies increase the conviction rate and exonerate the innocent.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice strengthensPremise B; however, you are looking for an answer that strengthens the conclusion. The response time to crimes is irrelevant to the argument's conclusion regarding biometric technologies and how they aid in increasing the conviction rate as well as exonerating the innocent.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This statement does not weaken the argument's conclusion regarding biometric technologies. Therefore, it can be eliminated.
Excellent!
[[snippet]]Criminals learning how to evade the accuracy of biometric technologies in identification would undermine the argument's conclusion regarding the increase in convictions and exonerations of the innocent.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]The status of the people investigating crimes would not undermine the argument's conclusion regarding convictions and exonerations.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice strengthensPremise B; however, you are looking for an answer that weakens the conclusion. The response time to crimes is irrelevant to the argument's conclusion regarding biometric technologies and how they aid in increasing the conviction rate as well as exonerating the innocent.
