Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: Roosevelt should be explained before judging consequences. is the best answer. It fits Part two: Bust: Americans' experiences of the Depression and New Deal within AD America, 1920-1973: Opportunity and inequality and directly supports Study the effectiveness of the New Deal on different groups, including successes, limitations, opposition from the Supreme Court, Republicans and Radical politicians,. Check this by using evidence, provenance, date, event, individual, policy, consequence; do not choose a distractor simply because it sounds historical.

The correct option is Roosevelt should be explained before judging. This MCQ is about Which option separates cause and consequence, not just general recall. The correct option works because it matches the period context of Paper 1 Section A: Period studies and uses the same evidence base as Study the effectiveness of the New Deal on different groups, including successes, limitations, opposition from the Supreme Court, Republicans and Radical politicians,. The rejected options are weaker: 1) A source comment with no provenance.; 2) A long-term cause treated as a result.; 3) A similarity presented as a difference.. To decide between them, students should identify, support, test, reject the option against chronology, evidence and the learning objective, then keep evidence separate from opinion and interpretation.