Cuando se corrige un estudio · B2. Relaciona la persona, hora, lugar o cantidad con el hecho correcto. Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista.
Lee el material original en inglés y responde con pruebas. El nivel es una orientación editorial, no un resultado certificado.
Lee el material original en inglés y responde con pruebas. El nivel es una orientación editorial, no un resultado certificado.
The following research case is fictional and is provided for reading practice, not as scientific evidence.
A community garden project compared two ways of reminding volunteers about watering duties. One group received a fixed weekly message; the other received a message only when its scheduled watering day was approaching. The project team initially reported fewer missed sessions in the second group and suggested that more timely reminders might be useful. It did not claim to have discovered the best reminder for every kind of voluntary work.
Several weeks later, a volunteer checking the records noticed that a cancelled session had been counted as a missed duty. The cancellation followed a damaged water pipe, not a failure by the person scheduled to attend. On its own, that entry changed little. However, the discovery prompted a review of how cancellations had been recorded across both groups.
The team found that one coordinator had removed cancelled sessions before calculating a rate, while another had retained them. The groups were therefore being compared on inconsistent terms. Correcting this difference reduced the apparent advantage of the day-specific reminders. A small difference remained, but the team considered it too uncertain to support the confidence of its original summary.
The corrected report kept the raw attendance records, explained the changed calculation and displayed the original summary beside the replacement. It did not quietly overwrite the earlier document. This allowed readers to see what had changed and why. Personal details of individual volunteers remained withheld; transparency about a method did not require publishing their private contact information.
Some readers interpreted the correction as proof that all the project’s work was worthless. Others wanted to ignore it because the remaining difference pointed in the same direction. The report rejected both responses. The collection of attendance information still described useful aspects of the project, but the strength of the original comparison had been overstated. Keeping the preferred conclusion while refusing to reconsider its support would not repair that problem.
For the next season, the team proposed a shared definition of a cancelled session, agreed before data collection began. It also planned to record whether a reminder had actually been delivered. A message sent to an outdated address could not influence attendance in the same way as one received and read, although delivery records alone would not show how carefully anyone considered it.
The case illustrates a distinction between defending a particular finding and improving a process for reaching findings. A correction can weaken a result while making the reasoning behind the next investigation more dependable. Its value depends on whether the explanation is specific enough for others to inspect, not on whether the revised headline remains impressive.
Relaciona la persona, hora, lugar o cantidad con el hecho correcto. Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.
Usa la razón dada; una razón externa que parece posible no basta. Relaciona la persona, hora, lugar o cantidad con el hecho correcto. Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista.
We meet inside because it is raining.
Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista. Considera todo el texto: un detalle verdadero no es necesariamente la idea principal.
The notice gives a price, but says nothing about delivery.
Lee el material original en inglés y responde con pruebas. El nivel es una orientación editorial, no un resultado certificado.
The following research case is fictional and is provided for reading practice, not as scientific evidence.
A community garden project compared two ways of reminding volunteers about watering duties. One group received a fixed weekly message; the other received a message only when its scheduled watering day was approaching. The project team initially reported fewer missed sessions in the second group and suggested that more timely reminders might be useful. It did not claim to have discovered the best reminder for every kind of voluntary work.
Several weeks later, a volunteer checking the records noticed that a cancelled session had been counted as a missed duty. The cancellation followed a damaged water pipe, not a failure by the person scheduled to attend. On its own, that entry changed little. However, the discovery prompted a review of how cancellations had been recorded across both groups.
The team found that one coordinator had removed cancelled sessions before calculating a rate, while another had retained them. The groups were therefore being compared on inconsistent terms. Correcting this difference reduced the apparent advantage of the day-specific reminders. A small difference remained, but the team considered it too uncertain to support the confidence of its original summary.
The corrected report kept the raw attendance records, explained the changed calculation and displayed the original summary beside the replacement. It did not quietly overwrite the earlier document. This allowed readers to see what had changed and why. Personal details of individual volunteers remained withheld; transparency about a method did not require publishing their private contact information.
Some readers interpreted the correction as proof that all the project’s work was worthless. Others wanted to ignore it because the remaining difference pointed in the same direction. The report rejected both responses. The collection of attendance information still described useful aspects of the project, but the strength of the original comparison had been overstated. Keeping the preferred conclusion while refusing to reconsider its support would not repair that problem.
For the next season, the team proposed a shared definition of a cancelled session, agreed before data collection began. It also planned to record whether a reminder had actually been delivered. A message sent to an outdated address could not influence attendance in the same way as one received and read, although delivery records alone would not show how carefully anyone considered it.
The case illustrates a distinction between defending a particular finding and improving a process for reaching findings. A correction can weaken a result while making the reasoning behind the next investigation more dependable. Its value depends on whether the explanation is specific enough for others to inspect, not on whether the revised headline remains impressive.
When a study is corrected
Usa la razón dada; una razón externa que parece posible no basta. Relaciona la persona, hora, lugar o cantidad con el hecho correcto. Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista.
We meet inside because it is raining.Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista. Considera todo el texto: un detalle verdadero no es necesariamente la idea principal.
The notice gives a price, but says nothing about delivery.Relaciona la persona, hora, lugar o cantidad con el hecho correcto. Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.Conserva el primer intento, comprueba la evidencia y prueba otra pregunta. Responder sobre el mismo material no demuestra transferencia a otro texto.
Aún no hay repasos. Prueba un calentamiento corto.
Relaciona la persona, hora, lugar o cantidad con el hecho correcto. Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.Usa la razón dada; una razón externa que parece posible no basta. Relaciona la persona, hora, lugar o cantidad con el hecho correcto. Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista.
We meet inside because it is raining.Distingue lo respaldado de lo desconocido. Que algo no se mencione no prueba que no exista. Considera todo el texto: un detalle verdadero no es necesariamente la idea principal.
The notice gives a price, but says nothing about delivery.Abrir una respuesta registra ayuda para esa pregunta.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «Weekly reminders with reminders timed near a person’s watering day.». Prueba: «One group received a fixed weekly message; the other received a message only when its scheduled watering day was approaching.». Compara la alternativa «Reminders used in gardening with those used by other voluntary organisations.». Esto atribuye a las pruebas más certeza o alcance del que permiten. Compara la alternativa «Fixed weekly messages with messages triggered by a water-pipe failure.». Esto sustituye el resultado medido o comunicado por otro distinto.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «A cancelled session had been counted as a missed duty.». Prueba: «a cancelled session had been counted as a missed duty.». Compara la alternativa «A revised summary showed a smaller difference before anyone checked the entries.». Esto confunde dos fases: la situación inicial y una comprobación o decisión posterior. Compara la alternativa «A missed duty caused the scheduled volunteer’s message to be withdrawn.». Esto confunde el motivo de una acción con una posible consecuencia u otra reacción.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «A water pipe was damaged.». Prueba: «The cancellation followed a damaged water pipe». Compara la alternativa «The scheduled volunteer could not be contacted at the recorded address.». Esto añade un detalle que el relato no aporta; que parezca plausible no lo convierte en prueba textual. Compara la alternativa «The team decided to stop collecting attendance records for the season.». Esto convierte un resultado matizado en una afirmación sin excepciones.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «The coordinators treated cancellations differently in the calculations.». Prueba: «one coordinator had removed cancelled sessions before calculating a rate, while another had retained them.». Compara la alternativa «The coordinators used different reminder times rather than different cancellation rules.». Esto sustituye el resultado medido o comunicado por otro distinto. Compara la alternativa «Cancelled sessions were removed from the rates for both groups.». Esto invierte la relación indicada en el texto.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «It became smaller and less convincing.». Prueba: «Correcting this difference reduced the apparent advantage of the day-specific reminders. A small difference remained, but the team considered it too uncertain to support the confidence of its original summary.». Compara la alternativa «The reduced difference still justified the original level of confidence.». Esto atribuye a las pruebas más certeza o alcance del que permiten. Compara la alternativa «The correction reversed the result and established weekly reminders as better.». Esto invierte la relación indicada en el texto.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «They would not show how carefully a message was considered.». Prueba: «delivery records alone would not show how carefully anyone considered it.». Compara la alternativa «They would establish that every delivered message had been considered carefully.». Esto atribuye a las pruebas más certeza o alcance del que permiten. Compara la alternativa «They could not help distinguish a failed delivery from a successful one.». Esto convierte un resultado matizado en una afirmación sin excepciones.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «It did not reveal volunteers’ private contact information.». Prueba: «transparency about a method did not require publishing their private contact information.». Compara la alternativa «It discarded the raw records so that individual entries could not be checked.». Esto invierte la relación indicada en el texto. Compara la alternativa «It allowed the corrected summary to be seen but not the original version.». Esto invierte la relación indicada en el texto.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «Dismissing all the work and ignoring the correction to preserve a preferred result.». Prueba: «Some readers interpreted the correction as proof that all the project’s work was worthless. Others wanted to ignore it because the remaining difference pointed in the same direction. The report rejected both responses.». Compara la alternativa «Agreeing cancellation rules and recording actual message delivery.». Esta afirmación es compatible con el relato. No es la respuesta porque se pide una idea rechazada, evitada o no justificada por las pruebas. Compara la alternativa «Retaining attendance data and explaining the corrected calculation.». Esta afirmación es compatible con el relato. No es la respuesta porque se pide una idea rechazada, evitada o no justificada por las pruebas.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «The attendance information about aspects of the project.». Prueba: «The collection of attendance information still described useful aspects of the project». Compara la alternativa «The original level of confidence in the superiority of day-specific reminders.». Esto atribuye a las pruebas más certeza o alcance del que permiten. Compara la alternativa «The applicability of the result to voluntary work beyond this project.». Esto atribuye a las pruebas más certeza o alcance del que permiten.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «A shared definition of a cancelled session.». Prueba: «a shared definition of a cancelled session, agreed before data collection began.». Compara la alternativa «The conclusion the next report should retain if the difference becomes smaller.». Esto invierte la relación indicada en el texto. Compara la alternativa «Which volunteers’ private contact details should accompany the published records.». Esto atribuye una característica o acción al grupo o hablante equivocado.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «It displayed it beside the corrected replacement.». Prueba: «displayed the original summary beside the replacement.». Compara la alternativa «It substituted a list of volunteers’ contact details for the original summary.». Esto invierte la relación indicada en el texto. Compara la alternativa «It retained the original as the only public account of the comparison.». Esto invierte la relación indicada en el texto.
When a study is corrected
La respuesta respaldada es «A weaker result can accompany a more dependable investigative process.». Prueba: «A correction can weaken a result while making the reasoning behind the next investigation more dependable.». Compara la alternativa «A calculation error removes the value of the underlying attendance information.». Esto usa una limitación para descartar toda la aportación, en vez de distinguir su utilidad de sus límites. Compara la alternativa «Improving the process confirms the substantive claim made in the original summary.». Esto atribuye a las pruebas más certeza o alcance del que permiten.