대광고 내신 · 마지막 두 선택지 주장 강도 5문항 · 모의고사형

A research team found that people in a quiet room recalled more words than people in a room with intermittent conversation. The result suggested that this kind of background speech could interfere with the task. It did not establish that all sound reduces every form of thinking. Music without words, steady mechanical noise, or a familiar sound might affect a different task differently. The researchers also distinguished average performance from individual responses: a group difference did not mean that every participant followed the same pattern. The useful conclusion was narrower than the slogan that silence makes everyone smarter. Narrowness was not a weakness in the finding. By preserving the task, the sound condition, and the level of comparison, it made the claim specific enough to test again and to apply with appropriate caution.

A research team found that people in a quiet room recalled more words than people in a room with intermittent conversation. The result suggested that this kind of background speech could interfere with the task. It did not establish that all sound reduces every form of thinking. Music without words, steady mechanical noise, or a familiar sound might affect a different task differently. The researchers also distinguished average performance from individual responses: a group difference did not mean that every participant followed the same pattern. The useful conclusion was narrower than the slogan that silence makes everyone smarter. Narrowness was not a weakness in the finding. By preserving the task, the sound condition, and the level of comparison, it made the claim specific enough to test again and to apply with appropriate caution.

A research team found that people in a quiet room recalled more words than people in a room with intermittent conversation. The result suggested that this kind of background speech could interfere with the task. It did not establish that all sound reduces every form of thinking. Music without words, steady mechanical noise, or a familiar sound might affect a different task differently. The researchers also distinguished average performance from individual responses: a group difference did not mean that every participant followed the same pattern. The useful conclusion was narrower than the slogan that silence makes everyone smarter. Narrowness was not a weakness in the finding. By preserving the task, the sound condition, and the level of comparison, it made the claim specific enough to test again and to apply with appropriate caution.

A research team found that people in a quiet room recalled more words than people in a room with intermittent conversation. The result suggested that this kind of background speech could interfere with the task. It did not establish that all sound reduces every form of thinking. Music without words, steady mechanical noise, or a familiar sound might affect a different task differently. The researchers also distinguished average performance from individual responses: a group difference did not mean that every participant followed the same pattern. The useful conclusion was narrower than the slogan that silence makes everyone smarter. Narrowness was not a weakness in the finding. By preserving the task, the sound condition, and the level of comparison, it made the claim specific enough to test again and to apply with appropriate caution.

A research team found that people in a quiet room recalled more words than people in a room with intermittent conversation. The result suggested that this kind of background speech could interfere with the task. It did not establish that all sound reduces every form of thinking. Music without words, steady mechanical noise, or a familiar sound might affect a different task differently. The researchers also distinguished average performance from individual responses: a group difference did not mean that every participant followed the same pattern. The useful conclusion was narrower than the slogan that silence makes everyone smarter. Narrowness was not a weakness in the finding. By preserving the task, the sound condition, and the level of comparison, it made the claim specific enough to test again and to apply with appropriate caution.