Which option separates cause and consequence?

Evidence check: causation should be explained before judging consequences. is the best answer. It fits British depth study assessment requirements within Paper 2 Section B interpretation and historic environment requirements and directly supports Explain historical events, issues or developments using causation, change, continuity and/or consequence. 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 causation 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 2 Section B: British depth studies including the historic environment and uses the same evidence base as Explain historical events, issues or developments using causation, change, continuity and/or consequence. 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.