Distractors can arise as a consequence of how informational text is organized, For example, look at the reading selection below detailing Family Supplement benefits. It contains 13 dollar amounts, four percentages, two dates, and five other references to periods of time. In the widest sense, all of this information is distracting if you, as a reader, want to know only one amount, or date, or rate; the information is plausible to the extent that it appears in the same passage under the same heading. In relation to specific questions and directives, some distracting information is more plausible, and hence likely to be selected by the less-skilled reader.

Imagine being given this passage and asked to identify the ‘maximum weekly amount’ for Employment Insurance supplemented by the Family Benefit. The correct answer, $413.00, is found under the third bullet, and is signalled by the words ‘maximum,’ ‘weekly,’ ‘rate,’ and the dollar sign to identify a ‘dollar amount.’

However, the words ‘maximum’ and ‘rate’ appear in the final bulleted paragraph associated with ‘65% of your average insurable earnings,’ and ‘80% of the average insurable earnings.’ These are both plausible answers to the question if one fails to make a distinction between ‘rate’ and ‘amount’ The distractors in this example match on the features ‘maximum’ and ‘benefit.’ They do not match on ‘weekly’ or ‘amount.’

One way to reduce the ‘noise’ of distracting information is to provide labels and headings which will allow the reader to read more selectively. In this case the five bullets under ‘Benefits’ could be replaced with headings that more accurately describe the content. The first two bullets and the fourth cover ‘reduction of FS benefits;’ the third and fifth deal with ‘limits to combined benefits.’