Matching features
Match statements to people, theories, places or dates. Finding the names takes seconds; the marks come from reading carefully around each name, seeing through paraphrased findings and working out exactly who said, found or criticised what.
By the end of this lesson you will be able to:
- Recognise the forms of matching features: researchers, theories, places, organisations, dates and periods, plus the related classification task
- Scan efficiently for every mention of each option, including surnames, pronouns and phrases such as ‘her team’
- Read the surrounding sentences to attribute findings correctly when one person reports, builds on or criticises another
- Match paraphrased findings precisely, including their strength, and handle reused and unused options
- Complete a seven-question features task on a passage about several researchers in about 12 minutes
What the task looks like
Look at the following statements (Questions 21–26) and the list of researchers below.
Match each statement with the correct researcher, A–E.
Write the correct letter, A–E, in boxes 21–26 on your answer sheet.
NB You may use any letter more than once.
Below the statements there is a box, for example List of Researchers: A Peter Lindqvist, B Helena Marsh, C Kenji Arata…
Facts you must know:
- The statements are not in passage order. Question 21 might be about the last researcher, Question 22 about the first.
- The options (names) are often listed in the order in which they first appear in the passage, which helps you find them quickly.
- Some options may not be used, and if the NB line appears, some may be used more than once. The instructions always tell you when reuse is allowed.
- The answer is the letter of the option, not the name.
- The options are not always people. You may match statements to theories, places, organisations, products or time periods.
A close relative: classification
Sometimes the options are categories: Classify the following features as belonging to A the Roman road network, B the Inca road network, C both. The method is the same: find what the passage says about each category, then check each feature against all of them, especially the both option.
Kinds of features and what to scan for
| Options are… | Scan for | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|
People / researchers | Surnames with capital letters | Later mentions by surname only, pronouns (she, his), possessives (Marsh's study), groups (her team, the Oslo group) |
Theories / approaches | Named theories: the X hypothesis, the Y model | A theory can be explained in one paragraph and criticised in another; the statement may be about either |
Places / organisations | Place names, acronyms, institutions | Later references such as there, the island, the agency, the authorities |
Dates / periods | Numbers, decades, centuries | Dates written indirectly: a decade later, by the turn of the century, the following year, during the war |
Categories (classification) | The category names and where each is described | A ‘both’ or ‘neither’ option: check every feature against every category |
Why the names are the easy part
Finding Marsh takes five seconds. Deciding which of seven statements belongs to Marsh takes reading. Here are the four attribution traps that cost the most marks:
1. The name appears in more than one place. A researcher introduced in paragraph 2 may return in paragraph 6. Check every mention before you decide.
2. Two names in one sentence. “Building on Ruiz's earlier survey, Patel showed that the effect disappeared in older children.” Who showed it? Patel. Ruiz only did the earlier survey.
3. Agreement and disagreement. “Costa rejects Brandt's claim that the change is an adaptation.” The claim that it is an adaptation belongs to Brandt; the rejection belongs to Costa. Read the verbs: rejects, questions, confirms, builds on, extends, overturns.
4. Reference without name. After the first mention, writers say she, his team, the study, these findings. Follow the chain back to the name. A paragraph may mention a researcher's name only once and then describe three more findings.
There is also a fifth trap: the name that stands nearby. A statement about perfectionism may sit right next to the name of a researcher who only reported what other people believe about perfectionism. Being close to a keyword is not the same as owning the idea.
Early studies of urban birds focused on noise. In 2003, Hans Brandt reported that great tits in noisy city parks sang at a higher pitch than those in quiet forests, and he interpreted this as an adaptation that allowed their songs to be heard above traffic. Maria Costa was not convinced. Her recordings suggested that the higher pitch was simply a side effect of birds singing more loudly, and she argued that Brandt had mistaken a consequence for a cause. More recently, Tanvir Hossain has shifted attention from noise to light. His team found that blackbirds living near street lamps began their dawn chorus up to an hour earlier than rural birds, a change which, in Hossain's view, may matter more for the birds' health than any change in pitch.
List of Researchers: A Hans Brandt · B Maria Costa · C Tanvir Hossain
- Birds change their song so that it can be heard over the noise of vehicles.
- A change in birdsong may be an accidental result of a different change.
- Artificial lighting affects the time at which birds start singing.
- Another researcher misunderstood the relationship between two factors.
- 1 → ABrandt “interpreted this as an adaptation that allowed their songs to be heard above traffic”. Costa also talks about higher pitch, but she rejects this interpretation, so the statement is not hers.
- 2 → BCosta: the higher pitch was “simply a side effect of birds singing more loudly”. Side effect = accidental result; singing more loudly = a different change.
- 3 → CHossain's team “found that blackbirds living near street lamps began their dawn chorus up to an hour earlier”. Street lamps = artificial lighting; began their dawn chorus earlier = the time at which birds start singing. Note “His team”: the finding is attributed through a pronoun.
- 4 → B againCosta “argued that Brandt had mistaken a consequence for a cause”. Brandt is named in this sentence, but he is the one being criticised. The criticism belongs to Costa. B is used twice, which is why the NB line matters.
How findings are paraphrased
| The statement says… | The passage may say… | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|
X found a link between A and B | A and B were associated / correlated / tended to rise together | A link is not a cause. “A causes B” is a stronger claim |
X disagreed with an earlier explanation | X was not convinced / challenged / disputed / cast doubt on / rejected | Make sure X is doing the rejecting, not being rejected |
X developed a new method | X pioneered / devised / came up with / was the first to use | The method may be named sentences after X's name |
X predicted that… | X expects / anticipates / believes … will | A past prediction that failed is still a prediction, but check the tense |
X's results were later confirmed | Subsequent studies replicated / supported X's findings | The statement is about X even if the sentence names someone else |
X studied a larger group than earlier researchers | X's sample of 4,000 dwarfed previous studies | Comparatives: larger, earlier, first, only |
X was the first to… | Before X, no one had…; X pioneered… | “Among the first” or “one of the first” is NOT “the first” |
A step-by-step method
- 1
Read the instructions and the options
Is there an NB line? How many options are there? What kind are they: people, places, dates? Note that the statements will not be in order.
- 2
Scan and mark every mention of every option
Circle (paper) or highlight (computer) each name every time it appears, including surname-only mentions and possessives. Note where pronouns like she or his team continue the reference.
- 3
Read the statements and underline the core idea
Focus on the action and the claim: found, believed, predicted, rejected + what. Underline qualifiers too: the first, more than, always, in children.
- 4
Work option by option
Read everything the passage says about the first person carefully, then check all the statements against it. Then move to the next person. This way you read each section once and see every possible match.
- 5
Check the attribution
Is this the person's own finding or opinion, or are they reporting, building on or attacking someone else's? The verbs decide: showed, argued, questioned, confirmed, rejected.
- 6
Check the paraphrase precisely
Same strength? Suggested is not proved; one of the first is not the first; a link is not a cause.
- 7
Reuse, eliminate, never leave a blank
With the NB line, the same letter may be correct twice; some options may never be used. If a statement is still unmatched at the end, choose the person whose section is closest in topic.
Check your understanding
6 questions- 1
In a matching features task, the statements (questions) are…
- 2
“Building on Ruiz's earlier survey, Patel showed that the effect disappeared among older children.”
Who showed that the effect disappeared among older children?
- 3
Hartmann's 2012 study found that children in cities slept less than children in rural areas. Mbeki did not dispute this finding, but she questioned Hartmann's explanation that traffic noise was responsible, pointing instead to later bedtimes linked to screen use.
Mbeki doubted that city children sleep less than rural children.
- 4
Hartmann's 2012 study found that children in cities slept less than children in rural areas. Mbeki did not dispute this finding, but she questioned Hartmann's explanation that traffic noise was responsible, pointing instead to later bedtimes linked to screen use.
Mbeki considered screen use a more likely cause of the difference than noise.
- 5
Match each passage expression with the statement wording that paraphrases it.
Her experiments demonstrated that…He maintains that…She cast doubt on…He anticipates that…Later teams replicated her results. - 6
The passage says: “Lindahl was among the first scientists to use satellite data to track glaciers.” Does this match the statement “Lindahl was the first person to use satellite data to track glaciers”?
Answer every question to check.
Exam practice: matching researchers and findings
Work at exam pace. The timer is a guide — it won't stop you.
Final quiz: matching features
10 questions- 1
“While Okoro insists that the decline began in the 1950s, Lindahl places it several decades later.”
Who believes the decline started in the middle of the twentieth century?
- 2
“Chen's model, later criticised by Alvarez for ignoring rainfall, predicted that yields would fall by a tenth.”
Statement: A forecast failed to take account of an important factor. Who does this statement refer to?
- 3
Same sentence: “Chen's model, later criticised by Alvarez for ignoring rainfall, predicted that yields would fall by a tenth.”
Statement: Someone pointed out that an approach left out a key variable. Who does this statement refer to?
- 4
Read the text, then match each date with the event.
The town's first public library opened in 1851. Its collection doubled in the 1890s, when a local merchant donated his private books, and the building was replaced in 1932 after a fire. In the 1970s the library began lending music recordings as well as books.
1851the 1890s1932the 1970s - 5
Classification. Read the text, then match each feature with the correct category.
Both the Romans and the Incas built road networks that linked distant provinces to a capital. Roman roads were paved with stone and designed for wheeled vehicles, whereas the Incas, who did not use wheeled transport, built narrow paths and steep stairways for people and llamas. The Incas also made suspension bridges from woven grass, a technique the Romans never used.
designed for wheeled trafficconnected outlying regions to a capital cityincluded bridges made from plant fibres - 6
Choose TWO true statements about matching features.
Select 2.
- 7
Diaz's team surveyed 4,000 households, a far larger sample than any earlier study of rural electricity use.
Diaz's study involved more participants than previous research on the topic.
- 8
You find “Dr Ahmed” in paragraph 2 and again in paragraph 6. What should you do before matching statements to Dr Ahmed?
- 9
Put the matching features method in order.
Drag the cards (or use the arrows) into the correct order.
- 1Check the instructions for the NB line and the type of options
- 2Underline the core claim in each statement
- 3Confirm who owns each idea and that the paraphrase matches exactly
- 4Mark every mention of each option in the passage
- 5Read about one option at a time and check all statements against it
- 10
When the instructions say “NB You may use any letter more than once”, one researcher can match more than statement.
Answer every question to check.
Key takeaways
Language for reporting research
Saved as flashcards with a free accountattribute
verb/əˈtrɪbjuːt/
to say or believe that something was caused, written, said or discovered by a particular person or thing
কারও প্রতি আরোপ করা, কারণ হিসেবে ধরা
The improvement in exam results was attributed to smaller class sizes.
corroborate
verb/kəˈrɒbəreɪt/
to provide evidence that supports a statement, theory or finding
সমর্থন করা, প্রমাণ দিয়ে নিশ্চিত করা
Satellite images corroborated the farmers' reports of river erosion.
dispute
verb/dɪˈspjuːt/
to say that something such as a fact or theory is not true or correct
বিরোধিতা করা, প্রশ্ন তোলা
Few scientists now dispute that sea levels are rising along the Bay of Bengal.
contend
verb/kənˈtend/
to state firmly that something is true, especially in an argument
দৃঢ়ভাবে দাবি করা
The authors contend that early intervention is far cheaper than later treatment.
replicate
verb/ˈreplɪkeɪt/
to repeat a study or experiment and obtain the same results
একই পরীক্ষা আবার করে একই ফল পাওয়া
Other laboratories have been unable to replicate the original results.
impulsive
adjective/ɪmˈpʌlsɪv/
acting suddenly without thinking carefully about the possible results
আবেগপ্রবণ, হঠকারী
Impulsive buyers are more likely to regret their online purchases.
predictor
noun/prɪˈdɪktə/
something that can be used to show what will happen in the future
পূর্বাভাসসূচক বিষয়
Attendance in the first month was the strongest predictor of final grades.
underlying
adjective/ˌʌndəˈlaɪɪŋ/
real and basic, but not immediately obvious
অন্তর্নিহিত, মূল
Traffic jams are a symptom; the underlying problem is poor public transport.
Keep your progress
You've completed 0 of 3 activities. A free Abroadway account saves your scores, turns new vocabulary into flashcards and builds a daily plan around your target band, with a full mock exam every week.