In discussing language development, what type of evidence supports the claim that exposure to varied vocabulary improves reading comprehension?

• A. Anecdotal evidence only.
• B. Philosophical reasoning without data.
• C. Hypothetical scenarios.
• D. Correlational data and empirical studies.

Answer: (D)

To understand whether exposure to varied vocabulary improves reading comprehension, you need data rather than opinions or imagined scenarios. Correlational data show whether, across many people, higher exposure to diverse words tends to go along with better reading comprehension. That shows a real association in real-world settings. Empirical studies add rigor by measuring vocabulary exposure and reading outcomes in a systematic way, often with controlled designs and statistical analyses, which helps determine how strong the relationship is and whether changes in exposure lead to changes in comprehension. When these data are combined, they provide credible support for the claim and offer insight into possible causal effects, especially when experimental designs manipulate exposure to vocabulary and observe the resulting impact on comprehension. In contrast, anecdotal reports, purely philosophical reasoning without data, or hypothetical scenarios don’t provide reliable, generalizable evidence.