Plausibility of Distractors

When information in the text meets some, but not all, of the conditions specified in the question or directive, it is referred to as a ‘distractor’ for the given information. When information in the text appears to complete the requested information frame, but is actually incorrect, it is referred to as a distractor for the requested information. The more conditions that a distractor shares with the search term or the correct answer, the more ‘plausible’ it becomes.

Imagine reading the text shown to the right in order to answer the question, “What do I do if I am not satisfied with the response given to me by staff at the department?

The given information frame can be stated as: There is something I should do if I am not satisfied with the response of department staff.

Looking at the text, we can see two places where the phrases ‘not satisfied’ and ‘response’ appear. Both instances are partial matches for the given information; one match will yield the requested information, “you may request a reconsideration,” the other is a distractor that points to the wrong answer, “appeal to a Review Tribunal.”

In the first instance, the response is given by ‘us’ and the reader has to identify the antecedent of this pronoun as the ‘department staff’ writing the pamphlet. In the second instance, the response is made by a person in a named position, the ‘Regional Director.’ He is clearly not included in the department staff as ‘our decision’ can be appealed to the ‘Regional Director.’