Introduction: Thinking Like a Detective

Welcome! In your Thinking Skills (9694) journey, one of the most useful skills you will learn is how to look at a piece of evidence and ask: "Why did this happen?"

In Paper 2 (Critical Thinking), you will often be given sources of evidence—like a news report, a graph, or a witness statement. The exam might ask you to suggest an explanation for what you see. This doesn't mean you have to know the "right" answer for sure; instead, you are being asked to use your logic to find a plausible (believable) reason for the facts. Don't worry if this seems tricky at first; it’s all about looking past the obvious!

What is an "Explanation" for Evidence?

An explanation is a statement that tells us how or why something is the case. In the context of your exam:

  • Evidence: The "What" (The facts, the data, or the observation).
  • Explanation: The "Why" (The cause or the reason behind the facts).

Example:
Evidence: A student's grades suddenly dropped in their final term.
Suggested Explanation: The student may have been ill during the exam period, or perhaps they were balancing a part-time job that took up their study time.

Suggesting Alternative Explanations

In Paper 2, the most important part of this skill is the ability to think of alternative explanations. Often, a source will suggest one reason for a trend, but as a critical thinker, you should ask: "Is there another way to explain this?"

The "Coincidence" vs. "Correlation" Trap

Just because two things happen at the same time doesn't mean one caused the other. This is a key area where you can suggest better explanations.

Example: A study shows that people who own expensive watches live longer.
Obvious (but likely wrong) explanation: The watch makes their heart beat better.
Better suggested explanation: People who can afford expensive watches are usually wealthier, meaning they have better access to healthcare and nutrition, which leads to a longer life.

Quick Tip: Look for the "Third Variable"

When two things seem linked (like A and B), often a third factor (C) is causing both of them. Suggesting that "Factor C" exists is a great way to show high-level thinking!

How to Suggest a Good Explanation (Step-by-Step)

When you are faced with a question asking you to "suggest an explanation" for a piece of evidence, follow these steps:

Step 1: Identify the "Target"
What exactly is the piece of evidence? Is it a sudden spike in a graph? Is it a contradiction between two witnesses? Clearly define what needs explaining.

Step 2: Brainstorm Causes
Think of at least two or three reasons why that "Target" might exist.

  • Could it be a timing issue?
  • Could it be a bias in the person reporting the evidence?
  • Could it be an external event that happened at the same time?

Step 3: Check for Plausibility
According to the 2028 syllabus, plausibility is a key part of credibility. Ask yourself: "Does my explanation actually make sense in the real world?" If your explanation requires aliens or magic, it’s not a good one for the exam!

Step 4: Use "Maybe" or "Perhaps"
Since you are suggesting, you don't need to be 100% certain. Use phrases like: "One possible explanation is..." or "This could be explained by..."

Avoiding Causal Fallacies

When suggesting explanations, be careful not to fall into these logical traps mentioned in the syllabus:

1. Post hoc: Assuming that because B happened after A, A must have caused B.
Example: "I wore my lucky socks and then I won the race; therefore, the socks caused the win." (Maybe you just practiced hard!)

2. Cum hoc: Assuming that because two things are happening at the same time, one causes the other.
Example: "Ice cream sales and sunburns both rise in July." (Ice cream doesn't cause sunburn; the hot sun causes both.)

Your Job: In the exam, your task is often to point out these fallacies by suggesting the real explanation (like the sun in the example above).

Common Mistakes to Avoid

  • Confusing "Explanation" with "Inference": An inference is a conclusion you draw from the evidence (e.g., "The cat is wet, so it must be raining"). An explanation is the reason for the evidence (e.g., "The cat is wet because it fell in the pond").
  • Being too vague: Don't just say "Something else happened." Be specific! Instead, say "A change in the local law might have caused the sudden drop in crime rates."
  • Ignoring the context: If the source material is about a school, your suggested explanation should relate to schools, students, or education.

Quick Review: Key Takeaways

1. Context: Suggesting explanations is a core skill for Paper 2, Section A.

2. The Goal: Provide a plausible reason for why a piece of evidence exists or why a trend is occurring.

3. Think Broadly: Look for "hidden factors" or "third variables" that might be the real cause of the evidence.

4. Terminology: Remember that a good explanation must be consistent with other evidence and plausible in its content.

Note: For more on how to judge if an explanation is good or bad, see the chapter on "Assess explanations for evidence".