UDEE Critical Thinking 5 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: An officer is presented with two competing explanations for the same evidence. According to the principle of parsimony (Occam's Razor), the officer should:
- Choose the more dramatic explanation to prepare for worst-case scenarios
- Favor the simpler explanation that requires fewer unsupported assumptions (Correct answer)
- Always accept the suspect's explanation to avoid bias
- Defer the decision to a supervisor
Correct answer: Favor the simpler explanation that requires fewer unsupported assumptions
Occam's Razor holds that among competing explanations, the one requiring the fewest unsupported assumptions is preferred until evidence demands more complexity.
Question 2: A report says crime rates in a district fell 15% after a new patrol strategy was implemented. A critical thinker would first ask:
- How can we immediately expand this strategy city-wide?
- Were there other changes during the same period that could explain the decline? (Correct answer)
- Which officers should receive promotions for the reduction?
- Should we stop using the old strategy immediately?
Correct answer: Were there other changes during the same period that could explain the decline?
Before attributing the change to the new strategy, a critical thinker must rule out confounding variables that occurred simultaneously.
Question 3: During a briefing, an officer hears: 'We've always responded to these calls this way.' This statement is an example of which logical fallacy?
- Appeal to authority
- Appeal to tradition (argumentum ad antiquitatem) (Correct answer)
- Slippery slope
- False dilemma
Correct answer: Appeal to tradition (argumentum ad antiquitatem)
The appeal to tradition fallacy argues that because something has always been done a certain way, it is the correct or best way.
Question 4: An investigator finds that every robbery in the past month occurred within three blocks of an ATM. The best next step is to:
- Arrest everyone who uses ATMs in those blocks
- Consider whether ATM proximity is coincidental or reflects offender target selection (Correct answer)
- Remove all ATMs from the area
- Conclude the ATM company is responsible
Correct answer: Consider whether ATM proximity is coincidental or reflects offender target selection
Spatial patterns may reflect rational offender behavior, but causal inference requires evaluating alternative explanations before drawing conclusions.
Question 5: Which scenario best illustrates the danger of 'tunnel vision' in an investigation?
- An officer who reviews all evidence before identifying a primary suspect
- An officer who focuses only on one suspect and ignores evidence pointing to others (Correct answer)
- An officer who consults with multiple units before making an arrest
- An officer who documents all witness statements regardless of consistency
Correct answer: An officer who focuses only on one suspect and ignores evidence pointing to others
Tunnel vision causes investigators to prematurely commit to one theory and filter out contradicting evidence, risking wrongful outcomes.
Question 6: An officer must assess whether a juvenile's signed confession is reliable. Which factor is LEAST relevant to that assessment?
- Whether the juvenile was advised of their rights
- Whether the juvenile was questioned in the presence of a parent or guardian
- The juvenile's prior academic grades (Correct answer)
- The length and conditions of the interrogation
Correct answer: The juvenile's prior academic grades
Academic performance has no established relationship to the voluntariness or reliability of a confession under interrogation conditions.
Question 7: Which of the following is the strongest evidence that an argument is logically valid?
- The conclusion feels intuitively correct
- The argument uses official-sounding language
- If the premises are true, the conclusion cannot be false (Correct answer)
- The argument is presented by a senior officer
Correct answer: If the premises are true, the conclusion cannot be false
Logical validity means the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises — if the premises hold, the conclusion must hold regardless of who presents it.
UDEE Critical Thinking 5
An officer is presented with two competing explanations for the same evidence.
According to the principle of parsimony (Occam's Razor), the officer should: