The survey detail that looks like the answer
Laia, a 17-year-old student, is practising the reading section of the PAU under timed conditions: 50 minutes for a 480-word article and four items. The article describes how a mid-sized Catalan city appointed a 'night mayor' in 2021 to mediate between bar owners, residents and the police. One paragraph reports a 2019 municipal survey: 62% of residents said nightlife improved the city's international image, 21% said it made their neighbourhood noisier, and 17% had no opinion. The item asks: 'Why does the author mention the 2019 survey?' The options are: (A) to show that most residents wanted fewer bars; (B) to suggest that opposition to nightlife was less widespread than assumed; (C) to criticise the night mayor's salary; (D) to advertise the survey's methodology. Laia chooses A. She tells her teacher she picked it because the words 'residents' and 'bars' appear in the paragraph. She has eight minutes left and has not re-read the paragraph.
1. Explain why option A is a distractor and build the case for the correct option using only the information described.
Read the worked answer
A is a lexical trap, not an inference. The paragraph contains the words 'residents' and 'bars', but it never says that residents wanted fewer bars. The figures do something different: 62% link nightlife to a better international image, 21% report more noise, and 17% have no opinion. A majority is positive and only a minority complains, so the survey does not support a demand for fewer bars.
B is correct because it describes the function of the detail. The author is not reporting the survey for its own sake; the numbers qualify the common assumption that residents are hostile to nightlife. 'Less widespread than assumed' is a paraphrase of '62% positive, 21% negative'.
C and D are unsupported. Salary is not mentioned, and the methodology is not evaluated. In the exam, ask what job the detail does in the argument, paraphrase the relevant sentence in your own words, and only then match it to an option. Single-word matching is what produced A.
2. Laia has eight minutes left. Give a concrete triage plan for the remaining time and one thing she should stop doing.
Read the worked answer
Triage plan (8 minutes):
- Do not re-read the whole article. Go item by item.
- Read the stem, underline the key phrase, and locate one sentence with that idea.
- Paraphrase that sentence silently before looking at the options.
- Eliminate options that need information not stated, even if they contain words from the text.
- Transfer answers to the answer sheet as you go, not at the end.
- Reserve the last two minutes to check that no item is blank and that the answer numbers match the question numbers.
Stop doing: choosing an option because it repeats vocabulary from the paragraph. That strategy rewards recognition, not comprehension, and it is exactly how A was selected.
3. Write a one-sentence rule Laia can apply to any 'why does the author mention X?' item, and explain why the rule works.
Read the worked answer
Rule: 'Find what changes in the argument because of X, then choose the option that names that change, not the option that repeats X's vocabulary.'
Why it works: these items test rhetorical function, not lexical recognition. The correct option usually paraphrases a relationship: it contrasts, supports, qualifies or gives an example. Distractors often recycle nouns and verbs from the paragraph while asserting a relationship the text never makes. If Laia applies the rule, A becomes visibly weaker: it reuses 'residents' and 'bars' but invents a demand that the percentages contradict.