D2.Psy.16.9-12: Thinking Critically to Become Better Consumers of Psychological Knowledge
In plain English: D2.Psy.16.9-12 is the C3 Framework psychology indicator for grades 9-12 that asks students to use critical thinking skills to become better consumers of psychological knowledge. Students learn to question claims about the mind in ads, posts and stories: who is making the claim, what evidence backs it, whether it measured what it claims, and how personal experience can mislead.
Use critical thinking skills to become better consumers of psychological knowledge.
C3 Framework for Social Studies (NCSS) · Dimension 2: Applying Disciplinary Concepts and Tools · Discipline: Psychology · Critical Thinking: Themes, Sources, and Evidence · Official standard
D2.Psy.16.9-12 asks students to use critical thinking skills to become better consumers of psychological knowledge. Claims about the mind reach students every day through apps, ads, posts and advice. A critical consumer asks who is making a claim and why, what evidence supports it, whether that evidence measured what is claimed, whether chance and selective attention could explain it, and whether anyone independent has checked it.
The lesson pairs two classic sources with two modern cases. Joseph Jastrow (1900) explains why coincidences and personal experience feel more convincing than they should, and why one person's view of a pattern differs from the statistical view. Thorndike and Woodworth (1901) tested whether training one mental skill improves others, the same question behind today's "brain training" claims. A 2016 Federal Trade Commission press release shows how such claims were challenged, and an invented ad lets students apply all five questions on their own.
Learning Objectives
By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:
Apply five critical questions (who, what evidence, does it measure the claim, chance and attention, independent check) to a psychological claim
Explain how selective attention and coincidence make personal experience a weak form of evidence
Distinguish near transfer from far transfer and judge whether evidence matches a claim
Rank kinds of evidence for a claim that something works and name the main weakness of each
Write a consumer report on a claim and a verdict that fits its evidence
Prior Knowledge Required
Students should already be comfortable with:
Experiments, comparison groups and random assignment D2.Psy.1.9-12
Using existing evidence to formulate conclusions D2.Psy.15.9-12
"Think of an ad, video or post that promised to make your brain sharper, your memory better or your mood happier. What made it convincing? What would you need to know before you paid for it?"
List the features students found convincing (a scientist in a lab coat, a before-and-after story, a number such as "90% saw results", the word "proven"). Leave the list up; at the end of the lesson students will sort it into features that are evidence and features that are not.
Direct Instruction20 minutes
Being a consumer of psychological knowledge. Everyone uses claims about the mind: study tips, apps, self-help books, ads, news stories and friends' advice. A critical consumer neither believes nor rejects such claims automatically, but asks questions before accepting them. Five questions do most of the work:
Who is making the claim, and what do they gain if people believe it?
What evidence is offered: a story, a single study, a study with a comparison group, or many studies?
Does the evidence measure what is claimed? Getting better at a game is not the same as getting better grades.
Could chance or attention explain it? We notice hits and forget misses.
Has anyone independent checked it? Reviews by other researchers or agencies count for more than a seller's own words.
Kinds of evidence for a claim that something works (guide written for this page)
Kind of evidence
What it can show
Main weakness
A personal story (testimonial)
That one person believes it helped
No comparison; chosen by the seller; memory and attention bias
A study with no comparison group
That people changed over time
They might have changed anyway, or from practice on the test
A randomized study with a comparison group
Whether the product causes a change in this sample
One sample; may not measure the outcome that matters
Several independent studies or a review
Whether the result holds across samples
Takes time; still limited to what was measured
Read Source 1. Joseph Jastrow, a professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin, wrote about why people believe in mental telepathy ("mental telegraphy"). His point applies to any claim backed by personal experience.
1I turn to another point, in some respects the most important of all; I refer to the readiness with which we interpret as the remarkable frequency of coincidences what is due to a strong interest in a given direction. Inasmuch as we observe what interests us, a recently acquired interest will lead to new observations--that is, new to us, however familiar they may be to others. Take up the study of almost any topic that appeals to human curiosity, and it takes no prophet to predict that within a short time some portion of your reading or your conversation, or some accidental information, will unexpectedly reveal a bearing on the precise subject of your study, often supplying a gap which it would have been most difficult otherwise to fill; but surely this does not mean that all the world has become telepathically aware of your needs and proceeded to attend to them. Some years ago I became interested in cases of extreme longevity, particularly of centenarianism, and for some months every conversation seemed to lead to this topic, and every magazine and newspaper offered some new item about old people. Nowadays my interest is transferred to other themes; but the paragrapher continues quite creditably to meet my present wants, and the centenarians have vanished. When I am writing about coincidences, I become keen to observe them; such for example as this: I was reading for the second time an article on "Mental Telegraphy" (by Mark Twain in "Harper's Monthly Magazine," December, 1891); I was occupied with what is there described as a most wonderful coincidence, the nearly simultaneous origination by the author and by Mr. William H. Wright of a similar literary venture,--when I happened to take my eyes from the page and saw on my desk a visiting-card bearing the name, "W. H. Wright." It was not the same W. H. Wright, but a gentleman whom I had met for the first time a few hours before, and have not seen since. Had I not been especially interested in this article and its subject, the identity of the names would certainly have escaped my attention, and there would have been no coincidence to record. [...]
2It is only necessary to become deeply interested in coincidences, to look about with eyes open and eager to detect them, in order to discover them on all sides; resolve to record all that come to hand, and they seem to multiply until you can regard yourself and your friends as providentially favored in this direction. [...]
Joseph Jastrow, Source 1: Jastrow on why coincidences seem to multiply (1900) (1900). Public domain (published 1900). Source text.
Then read Source 3. In 1901 the psychologists E. L. Thorndike and R. S. Woodworth tested a popular belief of their time: that training one mental skill strengthens the mind in general. The question still matters: many products today promise that practice on one task will improve other abilities. Psychologists call improvement on similar tasks near transfer and improvement on very different tasks far transfer.
1Our chief method was to test the efficiency of some function or functions, then to give training in some other function or functions until a certain amount of improvement was reached, and then to test the first function or set of functions. Provided no other factors were allowed to affect the tests, the difference between the test before and the test after training measures the influence of the improvement in the trained functions on the functions tested. [...]
2The evidence given by our experiments makes the following conclusions seem probable: It is misleading to speak of sense discrimination, attention, memory, observation, accuracy, quickness, etc., as multitudinous separate individual functions are referred to by any one of these words. These functions may have little in common. There is no reason to suppose that any general change occurs corresponding to the words 'improvement of the attention,' or 'of the power of observation,' or 'of accuracy.' [...] Improvement in any single mental function need not improve the ability in functions commonly called by the same name. It may injure it. Improvement in any single mental function rarely brings about equal improvement in any other function, no matter how similar, for the working of every mental function-group is conditioned by the nature of the data in each particular case. [...] The general consideration of the cases of retention or of loss of practice effect seems to make it likely that spread of practice occurs only where identical elements are concerned in the influencing and influenced function.
[...]
3There was a series of about 125 pieces of paper cut in various shapes. (Area test series.) Of these 13 were rectangles of almost the same shape and of sizes from 20 to 90 sq. cm. (series 1), 27 others were triangles, circles, irregular figures, etc., within the same limits of size (series 2). A subject was given the whole series of areas and asked to write down the area in sq. cm. of each one. [...] After being thus tested the subject was given a series of paper rectangles, from 10 to 100 sq. cm. in area and of the same shape as those of series 1. These were shuffled and the subject guessed the area of one, then looked to see what it really was and recorded his error. [...] After a certain amount of improvement had been made he was re-tested with the 'area test series' in the same manner as before.
E. L. Thorndike and R. S. Woodworth, Source 3: Thorndike and Woodworth test whether training spreads (1901) (1901). Public domain (published 1901). Source text.
Attention can make a claim look true: Source 1, paragraph 1
Jastrow writes that "we observe what interests us," so a new interest leads to observations that seem new.
Result: Consumer case: a student starts a "focus" playlist and then notices every good study session, while bad sessions slip by unnoticed. Question to ask: am I counting all my sessions, or only the ones I notice? A fair test would record every session, with and without the playlist.
General words can hide many skills: Source 3, paragraph 2
Thorndike and Woodworth write that functions called by one word, such as attention or memory, "may have little in common."
Result: Consumer case: an app says it trains "your attention." Question to ask: attention to what? Better scores on the app's own task are near transfer; better focus in class would be far transfer and needs its own evidence.
Confidence is not evidence: Source 2, paragraph 2
Jastrow writes that a narrator may be sure "that all the details are given; and yet this feeling of confidence is by no means to be trusted."
Result: Consumer case: a reviewer is completely sure a supplement fixed her memory. Her certainty tells us how she feels, not whether the supplement worked; we need a comparison with people who did not take it.
Big claims need big evidence: Source 4, paragraph 2
According to the FTC's complaint, the company advertised that short sessions of its games could help users reach their "full potential in every aspect of life."
Result: Consumer case: the broader the promise, the more kinds of outcomes it needs evidence for. A claim about "every aspect of life" would need studies of school, work, health and more.
Close the segment: Which of the five questions would have helped most with the ad you thought of in the warm-up?
Guided Practice15 minutes
Read Source 2 together, two more passages from the same chapter by Jastrow. Then read Source 4, a press release from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the federal agency that acts against deceptive advertising. Note: the release reports the FTC's charges and a settlement, not a court's finding of facts; the company is a real business, and the lesson uses only what the release states.
1[...] The owners of a gaming-table, counting upon the statistical regularity of the accidental, are assured of a steady income; they are interested long enough to obtain an extensive view of the fluctuations, and to see the law that guides the whole. Not so the individual player; he is interested only in that particular portion of the game in which his money is at stake. He detects mysterious laws of fortune and freaks of luck; sees in a series of coincidences or momentary successes the proofs of his pet schemes, and dismisses the general doctrine of chances with disdain, because it is not obviously applicable to his case. This influences the losers as well as the winners; both are absorbed in their own minute portions of the game, and forget that the law makes distinct provision for temporary losses and gains, great and small, but is as indifferent to the times and order of such occurrences as to the personality of those affected.
[...]
2It becomes important in the further consideration of coincidences to emphasize the great opportunity presented in their description for error, for defective observation, for neglect of details, for exaggeration of the degree of correspondence; and equally demonstrable is the slight amount of such error or mal-observation that is all-sufficient to convert a plain fact into a mystery. [...] The narrator may be confident that the points of the story are correctly observed, that all the details are given; and yet this feeling of confidence is by no means to be trusted. [...]
Joseph Jastrow, Source 2: Jastrow on the gaming table and on confident storytellers (1900) (1900). Public domain (published 1900). Source text.
1The creators and marketers of the Lumosity “brain training” program have agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges alleging that they deceived consumers with unfounded claims that Lumosity games can help users perform better at work and in school, and reduce or delay cognitive impairment associated with age and other serious health conditions.
[...]
2According to the FTC’s complaint, the Lumosity program consists of 40 games purportedly designed to target and train specific areas of the brain. The company advertised that training on these games for 10 to 15 minutes three or four times a week could help users achieve their “full potential in every aspect of life.” The company sold both online and mobile app subscriptions, with options ranging from monthly ($14.95) to lifetime ($299.95) memberships.
[...]
3The FTC alleges that the defendants claimed training with Lumosity would 1) improve performance on everyday tasks, in school, at work, and in athletics; 2) delay age-related cognitive decline and protect against mild cognitive impairment, dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease; and 3) reduce cognitive impairment associated with health conditions, including stroke, traumatic brain injury, PTSD, ADHD, the side effects of chemotherapy, and Turner syndrome, and that scientific studies proved these benefits.
4The complaint also charges the defendants with failing to disclose that some consumer testimonials featured on the website had been solicited through contests that promised significant prizes, including a free iPad, a lifetime Lumosity subscription, and a round-trip to San Francisco.
5The proposed stipulated federal court order requires the company and the individual defendants, [...] to have competent and reliable scientific evidence before making future claims about any benefits for real-world performance, age-related decline, or other health conditions.
[...]
6NOTE: The Commission authorizes the filing of a complaint when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. A stipulated order has the force of law when signed by the district court judge.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Source 4: Federal Trade Commission press release on Lumosity (January 5, 2016) (2016). US government work (17 U.S.C. 105). Source text.
Who? In Source 4, who made the claims, and what did they sell? (Paragraph 2 gives the prices.)
What was claimed? Paragraph 3 lists three kinds of claims. Which are about near transfer and which about far transfer, in the sense of Source 3?
Evidence. Paragraph 4 is about testimonials. Ask: why would it matter how the testimonials were collected?
Independent check. Paragraph 6: what does it mean that the FTC files a complaint when it has "reason to believe" the law was broken? How should a reader treat the charges?
Statistical view. Source 2, paragraph 1: how is a single user's experience like the individual player's view of the game?
Independent Practice15 minutes
Students read Source 5 on their own. It is an invented ad for an invented product, with invented numbers, written for this page. Its "study" is weak on purpose: 24 volunteers, run by the company, with no comparison group.
1Invented advertisement with invented numbers, written for this page. It is not a real product.
2"FOCUSFORGE: THE BRAIN GAME THAT BOOSTS YOUR GRADES. Play our 5-minute memory game every day and watch your report card soar!"
3"Clinically tested! In our study, 21 of 24 students improved their FocusForge scores after two weeks of daily play."
4"'I started FocusForge in March and got an A on my history test in April!' (Jordan, 16, winner of our Summer Superfan contest)"
5"Developed by brain experts. Only $9.99 a month, or $79 for a full year. Results guaranteed or your first month back."
6The fine print at the bottom of the page says: "Study conducted by FocusForge staff. Participants were volunteers from our user community. Grades were not measured."
SVHS (invented scenario), Source 5: An ad for a brain game (invented scenario) (2026). Original passage written for this page.
Task: write a five-line consumer report on Source 5, one line for each of the five questions from Direct Instruction, each citing a paragraph. End with a one-sentence verdict that fits the evidence. If students describe a fairer test, they plan it on paper only. Sources 1-5 are used again in the quiz and homework.
Closure5-10 minutes
Exit ticket: "Go back to the warm-up list. Circle the features that are evidence and cross out the ones that are not. Then write the one question you will ask the next time you see a claim about the brain."
Teacher notes. (1) Source 4 is a real federal press release about a real company; it reports charges and a settlement, not proven facts, and the page omits the names of individuals. (2) Source 5 and its product, people and numbers are invented. (3) Thorndike and Woodworth tested a small number of adults in 1901, so their article is an early, limited study, not the last word on transfer. (4) If health claims in ads lead students to worry about their own memory or attention, encourage them to talk with a parent, school counselor or health care provider rather than an ad.
Differentiation Strategies
For Struggling Students
Give the five questions as a checklist with a sentence starter for each
Let students do the consumer report on Source 5 in pairs, one question each, then combine
Pre-mark the sentence in Source 4 that answers each Guided Practice question
For Advanced Students
Find a claim in Source 4, paragraph 3 that would need a different kind of study from the others, and describe that study
Explain why a company-run study with no comparison group could show improvement even if the product does nothing
Compare Thorndike and Woodworth's claim with the FTC's: which is about evidence and which is about advertising, and how do they support each other?
Assessment Guidance
What to Look For
Strong answers apply the questions to the specific claim, quote the source with its paragraph number, and separate what the evidence shows from what is claimed (game scores against grades, for example). Watch for students who reject every claim (cynicism is not critical thinking), who treat a testimonial or a number such as "90% saw results" as proof, or who treat the FTC's charges as a court's findings. Verdicts should be calibrated: "not supported by this evidence" is often more accurate than "fake."
02
Classroom Activities
3 Activities
1
Claim Detector: Eight Claims About the Mind
15 minGroups of 3-4
Each group gets 8 Claim Cards, all invented for this page. For each card, groups name the kind of evidence offered (personal story, study with no comparison group, randomized study, several studies or review, or no evidence at all) and write the one question a critical consumer should ask first.
The 8 Claim Cards (all invented)
"My grandmother does crossword puzzles every day and her memory is perfect at 90."
"In our trial, 300 students were randomly assigned to use our flashcard app or a printed deck; both groups improved by about the same amount on the vocabulary test."
"Users of our calm app say they feel 40% less stressed after one month." (No comparison group.)
"Scientists agree this tea unlocks hidden brain power." (No study named.)
"A review of 25 studies by independent researchers found that spaced practice helped students remember word lists better than cramming."
"Since I started wearing this bracelet I have not had a single bad test day."
"Our memory game made players 3 times faster at our memory game."
"A famous athlete uses our focus drink before every game."
Answer Key
Personal story: cards 1 and 6. Ask: what about people who did the same thing and did not benefit, and days that did not fit?
Study with no comparison group: cards 3 and 7. Ask: would people have improved anyway? Card 7 also measures only the game itself (near transfer).
Randomized study: card 2. Ask: what did it compare? Here the app did no better than paper.
Several studies or review: card 5. Ask: who did the review, and do its tasks (word lists) match the claim?
No evidence: cards 4 and 8. Ask: what study? A famous user is not evidence.
Debrief Questions
Which card sounds most convincing but has the weakest evidence?
Card 2 is strong evidence that goes against the seller. Why might a company publish it anyway, and why should a consumer value that?
2
Near or Far? Six Training Claims
15 minPairs
Using Source 3, pairs sort 6 invented training claims into near transfer (the training and the outcome share many identical elements) and far transfer (they share few), and say what evidence each would need.
The 6 Strips
Practicing typing on a keyboard improves typing speed on a different keyboard.
Playing a fast video game improves grades in chemistry.
Practicing Spanish vocabulary flashcards improves scores on a Spanish vocabulary quiz.
Memorizing poems makes a person better at remembering where they left their keys.
Practicing free throws improves free-throw percentage in games.
Solving logic puzzles every day makes a person a better driver.
Answer Key
Near: strips 1, 3 and 5 (the trained task and the outcome share keys, words or the same shot). Far: strips 2, 4 and 6 (the trained task and the outcome share few elements). Far claims need direct evidence on the outcome itself; Source 3's results make them doubtful without it.
Variation: Find a Real Ad
For homework, students may describe in words (no screenshots or links) one training claim they have seen and place it on the near-far line.
3
Consumer Report on FocusForge
15 minGroups of 3
Groups turn their Independent Practice notes into a one-page consumer report on the invented ad in Source 5, with a rating for each of the five questions (strong, weak or missing) and a short verdict. Reports are shared in class only.
Report Template
Who makes the claim and what they gain.
The evidence offered, and its kind on the evidence ladder.
What was measured compared with what is claimed.
How chance or attention could explain the results.
Whether anyone independent checked it.
Verdict, in one calibrated sentence.
Discussion
Compare verdicts across groups. Which wording is fairest to the company and most useful to a buyer?
03
Diagrams & Visual Aids
1 diagrams
Diagram 1: An Evidence Ladder for Claims That Something Works
Kinds of evidence for a claim that a product or method works, from weaker (bottom) to stronger (top). Even the top rung is limited to what was measured. The ladder is a teaching summary written for this page.
04
Homework Assignment
~30 min
Homework: Becoming a Better Consumer of Psychology
Directions: Part 1 uses Sources 1, 3 and 4. Quote every source you use with its paragraph number. Part 2 asks you to judge new claims and to plan a fair test on paper only: do not run it on anyone.
Part 1: Critical Thinking with the Sources (Problems 1-3)
In Source 1, paragraph 1, Jastrow describes his interest in centenarians (people who live to 100). Explain what happened when his interest changed, what this shows about personal experience as evidence, and give an example from your own life or an invented one.
Source 4, paragraph 2 gives a monthly price of $14.95 and a lifetime price of $299.95. How much would 12 months cost at the monthly price? After how many months would the monthly total pass the lifetime price? Show your work, then explain why a seller's income from a claim is a reason to look for independent evidence.
Source 3, paragraph 2 says there is "no reason to suppose that any general change occurs corresponding to the words 'improvement of the attention.'" Explain this in your own words and use it to question an invented ad that promises to "train your attention for school."
Part 2: Judging New Claims (Problems 4-6)
Invented case: a headline reads "Supplement Boosts Memory 40%!" The study behind it gave the supplement to 30 adults for a month, with no group taking a look-alike pill, and found that their scores on a word-list test rose by 40% from the first test to the second. Name three problems a critical consumer should notice.
Plan, on paper only, a fair test of whether a study app improves high school grades. Describe the groups, how students are placed in them, what you would measure, and one ethical step (such as consent from students and parents).
Invent an ad for a "mood-boosting" app that offers three kinds of evidence: one testimonial, one number from a company study, and one endorsement. Then judge your own ad: use the Direct Instruction table to name the kind of each piece of evidence and its main weakness, and end with a one-sentence verdict that fits the evidence.
Rubric
Criterion
Full Credit (2 pts)
Partial Credit (1 pt)
No Credit (0 pts)
Critical questions
Applies the right questions to the specific claim and explains each answer
Questions applied but one is vague or misapplied
Questions missing
Use of sources
Quotations with source and paragraph numbers support each point
Sources named without paragraph numbers, or one point unsupported
No sources used
Evidence and limits
Separates what was measured from what is claimed and notes weak samples; computations correct
Mostly correct with one gap or error
Treats stories or numbers as proof
Fair test
Plan has a comparison group, random assignment, the right outcome and an ethical step, on paper only
Plan has some of these
No plan, or a plan that would harm or deceive participants
05
Quiz: 20 Questions
Interactive, with answers
Instructions
Sources 1 and 3 are printed in Direct Instruction, Sources 2 and 4 in Guided Practice, and Source 5 in Independent Practice. Source 1 is used in Questions 1, 2, 15 and 20; Source 2 in Questions 3, 4, 14, 16 and 20; Source 3 in Questions 5-8, 13, 17 and 20; Source 4 in Questions 9-11, 18 and 20; and Source 5 in Questions 12-14, 19 and 20. Questions 1-14 are multiple choice; 15-20 are short answer.
Multiple choice: pick an option to check it. Short answer: write your answer, then reveal the model answer.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Source 1, paragraph 1, who was the W. H. Wright whose visiting card Jastrow saw on his desk?
Answer: A
Jastrow writes: "It was not the same W. H. Wright, but a gentleman whom I had met for the first time a few hours before." B confuses him with Mark Twain, the article's author; the other Mr. Wright is the person in Twain's story. C and D are not in the source.
Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 1, paragraph 1, what would have happened if Jastrow had not been interested in the article?
Answer: C
He writes that without his interest "the identity of the names would certainly have escaped my attention, and there would have been no coincidence to record." The coincidence existed only because his interest made him notice it. D reverses his argument, which explains such experiences by attention, not telepathy. A and B are not in the source.
Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 2, paragraph 1, what do the owners of a gaming-table have that the individual player lacks?
Answer: B
The owners "are interested long enough to obtain an extensive view of the fluctuations, and to see the law that guides the whole," while the player watches only "that particular portion of the game in which his money is at stake." C describes the player, not the owners. A is not in the source; their income comes from "the statistical regularity of the accidental." D is not the contrast Jastrow draws.
Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which consumer behavior is most like Jastrow's individual player in Source 2, paragraph 1?
Answer: D
The player "sees in a series of coincidences or momentary successes the proofs of his pet schemes." A few good days are momentary successes. A is the owners' statistical view, the opposite of the player's. B and C are critical-consumer habits, not the player's mistake.
Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 3, paragraph 1, what was Thorndike and Woodworth's chief method?
Answer: A
"Our chief method was to test the efficiency of some function or functions, then to give training in some other function or functions ... and then to test the first function or set of functions." B replaces a test with self-report. C describes a comparison-group design, which is not what this paragraph says. D leaves out the training.
Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 3, paragraph 2, what can improvement in one mental function do to the ability in functions "commonly called by the same name"?
Answer: C
"Improvement in any single mental function need not improve the ability in functions commonly called by the same name. It may injure it." A is the general-improvement belief the authors argue against. D reverses their point that such functions "may have little in common." B is not in the source.
Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 3, paragraph 2, when does "spread of practice" occur?
Answer: B
The authors write that spread of practice "occurs only where identical elements are concerned in the influencing and influenced function." D is the mistake they warn against: a shared name such as attention does not mean shared elements. A and C are not in the source.
Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In the area experiment in Source 3, paragraph 3, what did the subject practice on between the two tests?
Answer: D
"The subject was given a series of paper rectangles, from 10 to 100 sq. cm. in area and of the same shape as those of series 1." A is the test of other shapes. B is the whole test series used before and after training. C confuses the training pieces with the test rectangles they resembled.
Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 4, paragraph 5, what does the proposed order require before the company makes future claims about benefits?
Answer: A
The order requires the company "to have competent and reliable scientific evidence before making future claims about any benefits." B is the kind of evidence that paragraph 4's charge about testimonials calls into question. C and D are not in the release.
Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 4, paragraph 4, what does the complaint charge that the company failed to disclose about some testimonials on its website?
Answer: D
The complaint charges a failure "to disclose that some consumer testimonials featured on the website had been solicited through contests that promised significant prizes." A prize gives people a reason to write glowing stories, so such testimonials are a biased sample. A, B and C are not in the release.
Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 4, paragraph 6, when does a stipulated order have the force of law?
Answer: B
The note says: "A stipulated order has the force of law when signed by the district court judge." A is part of what makes it stipulated (agreed) but is not what gives it force. C is the step that authorizes filing the complaint, which comes earlier. D has no legal effect.
Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Source 5, paragraph 3, what percent of the 24 students improved their FocusForge scores?
Answer: C
21 / 24 = 0.875, or 87.5%. A reads the count 21 as a percent, and B reads the group size 24 as a percent. D divides the wrong way, 24 / 21. Even 87.5% says nothing about grades, and with no comparison group the students might have improved from practice alone.
Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which statement best describes the gap between what Source 5 measured and what it claims?
Answer: A
Paragraph 3 reports improved "FocusForge scores," and the fine print in paragraph 6 says "Grades were not measured," yet paragraph 2 promises a report card that will "soar." This is the near-versus-far transfer gap from Source 3. B reverses the two. C ignores the game scores, and D contradicts the fine print.
Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Why is Jordan's testimonial in Source 5, paragraph 4 weak evidence that FocusForge improves grades?
Answer: C
One A after starting the game is a "momentary success" of the kind Jastrow's player treats as proof (Source 2, paragraph 1): Jordan might have earned it without the game, and students who used the game and did worse are not quoted. A is false (March and April are given). B and D do not matter: students' and history grades are what the ad is about.
Question 15 of 20 · Short Answer
Using Source 1, explain how a strong interest can make a claim seem true. Then apply Jastrow's idea to an invented case: a student who has just started using a "study music" app and says, "Ever since I got it, I keep having great study sessions."
Model answer: Jastrow says "we observe what interests us," so a new interest makes related events stand out (paragraph 1); once he cared about centenarians, every newspaper seemed to mention them, and once his interest changed "the centenarians have vanished." The events did not become more common; his noticing did. The student now pays attention to study sessions because of the new app, so good sessions stand out and bad ones are forgotten. A fair check would record every session, with and without the music, for several weeks. Rubric: 2 = explains the idea with a quotation and applies it with a way to check; 1 = one of these; 0 = neither.
Question 16 of 20 · Short Answer
Source 2, paragraph 1 contrasts the gaming-table owners with the individual player. Explain the difference between the individual view and the statistical view, and what kind of evidence a consumer should look for as a result.
Model answer: The player sees only his own part of the game and treats "momentary successes" as proof of his schemes, while the owners see "the fluctuations" over many games and "the law that guides the whole." One person's experience includes ups and downs that happen by chance. A consumer should look for results across many users, ideally compared with a group that did not use the product, rather than one person's lucky streak, including their own. Rubric: 2 = both views explained with a quotation and the evidence implication stated; 1 = one view or no implication; 0 = neither.
Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer
Use Source 3 to explain why a claim that "a memory game will improve your grades" should be doubted until there is direct evidence. Then name one limit of Thorndike and Woodworth's study.
Model answer: Thorndike and Woodworth found that improvement in one function "rarely brings about equal improvement in any other function, no matter how similar," and that practice spreads "only where identical elements are concerned" (paragraph 2). A memory game and school grades share few identical elements, so improvement in the game would be near transfer and better grades would be far transfer, which needs its own evidence. Limit: the 1901 study trained a small number of adults on a few lab tasks, such as estimating areas (paragraph 3), so it is early, limited evidence and not the final word on transfer. Rubric: 2 = applies the finding with a quotation and names a real limit; 1 = one of these; 0 = neither.
Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer
Name three warning signs from Source 4 that a consumer could look for in other ads about the brain. Give the paragraph for each.
Model answer: (1) Claims of far transfer and health benefits, such as better performance "in school, at work, and in athletics" and protection against serious conditions, said to be proved by studies (paragraph 3). (2) Testimonials that, the complaint charges, were solicited through prize contests without saying so (paragraph 4). (3) Claims that the FTC charged were unfounded (paragraph 1); the order now requires competent and reliable scientific evidence before future claims (paragraph 5). Very broad promises (paragraph 2) are another sign. Rubric: 2 = three signs, each with a paragraph number; 1 = one or two; 0 = none.
Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer
Rewrite the main claim of the ad in Source 5 so that it fits the ad's own evidence, then describe on paper a fair test of the original claim.
Model answer: Fitted claim: "In a company-run trial with 24 volunteer users and no comparison group, 21 improved their scores on the FocusForge game after two weeks; grades were not measured." Fair test: recruit students, with parent and student consent, and randomly assign them to play FocusForge or a different game for the same time each day for a semester; compare their grades, collected by the school, and have someone outside the company analyze the results. Rubric: 2 = a fitted claim that matches the evidence and a test with random assignment, a comparison group, grades as the outcome and consent; 1 = one part; 0 = neither.
Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer
Write a short checklist of four questions a critical consumer should ask about any claim about the mind. Tie each question to a different source from this lesson.
Model answer: (1) Could my attention be fooling me? (Source 1: "we observe what interests us.") (2) Am I judging from one streak or from many cases? (Source 2: the owners' view of "the fluctuations.") (3) Does the evidence measure what is claimed? (Source 3: practice spreads "only where identical elements are concerned.") (4) Who collected the evidence, and has anyone independent checked it? (Source 4: the charge that testimonials were solicited through prize contests, paragraph 4; Source 5: "Study conducted by FocusForge staff.") Rubric: 2 = four clear questions, each tied to a different source; 1 = two or three; 0 = fewer.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
06
Frequently Asked Questions
10 Questions
What does D2.Psy.16.9-12 mean?
D2.Psy.16.9-12 asks high school students to use critical thinking skills to become better consumers of psychological knowledge. It is an indicator in the C3 Framework's psychology companion (Appendix B), in the group on critical thinking about themes, sources and evidence. Students should be able to question claims about the mind that they meet in ads, apps, news and advice, and judge how well the evidence supports them.
What does it mean to be a consumer of psychological knowledge?
It means using claims about the mind in everyday life: choosing a study method, an app, a self-help book or advice from a friend. A critical consumer asks who is making the claim, what evidence backs it, whether the evidence measured what is claimed, whether chance or attention could explain it, and whether anyone independent checked it.
Is critical thinking the same as rejecting every claim?
No. Rejecting everything is as uncritical as believing everything. The aim is to match belief to evidence: a claim backed by several independent studies deserves more trust than one backed by a testimonial. Verdicts such as "not supported by this evidence" are often more accurate than "fake."
What is the difference between near and far transfer?
Near transfer is improvement on tasks very similar to the one practiced; far transfer is improvement on quite different tasks. Thorndike and Woodworth's 1901 study (Source 3) found that training spread mainly where tasks shared "identical elements," which is why claims of far transfer need direct evidence.
Why does a D2.Psy.16.9-12 lesson use sources from 1900 and 1901?
The questions consumers face are old. Jastrow explained in 1900 why coincidences and personal experience feel convincing, and Thorndike and Woodworth tested training claims in 1901. Pairing them with a 2016 FTC case shows that the same reasoning still applies. The 1901 study is small and early, and the page says so.
Is it fair to use a real company as an example?
The page uses only what the Federal Trade Commission's own press release states, and it reminds students that the release reports charges and a settlement, not a court's findings. It omits the names of individuals. The invented ad in Source 5 is used for the students' own judging.
How is D2.Psy.16.9-12 different from D2.Psy.15.9-12?
D2.Psy.15.9-12 asks students to draw conclusions from evidence the way a researcher would. D2.Psy.16.9-12 applies that thinking to everyday claims made by others, often people with something to sell, and asks students to judge them as consumers.
What is a common mistake students make when judging claims?
A common mistake is treating a number as proof: "90% improved" sounds strong until you ask improved at what, compared with whom, and measured by whom. Another is trusting a confident testimonial. Have students say what each number measures before they judge it.
Do students test any products in this lesson?
No. Students judge claims and plan fair tests on paper only. Any real test with students would need permission from students and parents and the school's approval.
How can I assess D2.Psy.16.9-12?
Give students a new claim, such as an invented ad or headline, and ask for a short consumer report using the five questions, with a calibrated verdict. Score whether they identify the kind of evidence, separate what was measured from what is claimed, and cite sources. The homework rubric gives ready-made criteria.
07
Related Standards
6 standards
These standards connect to D2.Psy.16.9-12: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.
Before this lesson
D2.Psy.15.9-12Prerequisite
Use existing evidence to formulate conclusions about psychological phenomena
Use psychological knowledge to promote healthy lifestyle choices
Lesson coming soon
Standard text: National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for Enhancing the Rigor of K-12 Civics, Economics, Geography, and History (Silver Spring, MD: NCSS, 2013). NCSS was not involved in the production of this lesson and does not endorse it.
