Question

how does the author’s use of evidence about the effects of air pollution in text 1 differ from the author’s use of evidence in text 2?
a. in text 1, the author offers ways to reduce air pollution.

b. in text 1, the author shares the experiences of residents affected by air pollution.

c. in text 1, the author cites statistics about air pollution.

d. in text 1, the author includes expert opinions about the causes of air pollution.

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze each option:

• Option A: Text 1 (the given text) does not focus on ways to reduce air pollution. It describes the situation and effects, so A is incorrect.
• Option B: While text 1 has resident quotes, the key difference in evidence type here is about statistics vs other forms. Also, the question is about how evidence on effects differs. The resident experiences are more about personal accounts, but let's check other options.
• Option C: Text 1 includes statistics like "more than 33 million residents", "more than 50 times the recommended safe limit". This is a key difference in evidence type (using stats about pollution effects/levels) compared to a hypothetical text 2 (not shown, but the options imply text 1's evidence type).
• Option D: Text 1 does not include expert opinions about the causes of air pollution. It mentions farmers burning fields as a cause but no expert opinions, so D is incorrect.

So the correct option is C as text 1 uses statistical evidence about air pollution (like pollution levels, population affected) to show effects.

Answer:

C. In text 1, the author cites statistics about air pollution.