三、逻辑关系陷阱：隐含因果或转折导致推理错误

陷阱本质：题干或选项通过"because""therefore"等词构建逻辑链，但原文未明确支持。

案例1
段落：
"Despite advancements in antibiotic therapy, MRSA infection rates in hospitals rose by 12% from 2020 to 2023. Experts attribute this trend to overprescription of broad-spectrum antibiotics, which disrupt normal flora and create resistant strains. However, a 2024 study found no correlation between antibiotic use and MRSA prevalence in outpatient settings."

题目：
Which statement is supported by the paragraph?
A. MRSA rates declined due to improved antibiotics.
B. Overprescription directly causes MRSA in hospitals.
C. Outpatient antibiotic use correlates with MRSA.
D. Broad-spectrum antibiotics have no side effects.

易错点：考生可能因"attribute"（归因）而误选B的绝对化表述。
解析：原文用"attribute...to"表示专家推测（B项"directly causes"过于绝对），A项与"rose by 12%"矛盾，C项与最后一句否定矛盾，D项无依据。

案例2
段落：
"A trial comparing vegan and Mediterranean diets found both reduced cardiovascular risk by 20% over two years. However, vegan participants reported 30% more gastrointestinal complaints, likely due to sudden fiber intake increase. Researchers emphasized that dietary choices should align with individual tolerance."

题目：
What can be inferred about dietary recommendations?
A. Vegan diets are superior for heart health.
B. Mediterranean diets cause fewer side effects.
C. Diet selection should ignore personal comfort.
D. Fiber intake is irrelevant to diet choice.

易错点：考生可能因"reduced cardiovascular risk by 20%"而高推结论。
解析：原文仅陈述事实（A项"superior"无比较依据，C项与"align with tolerance"矛盾，D项与"fiber intake increase"矛盾），B项可通过"30% more complaints"合理推论。

四、绝对化表述陷阱：选项使用绝对化词汇（如all/must）

陷阱本质：医学研究结论通常具有条件性，绝对化表述往往错误。

案例1
段落：
"A 2025 study on sleep patterns revealed that adults sleeping 6-7 hours nightly had a 15% lower mortality risk than those sleeping 8 hours. However, researchers cautioned that individual sleep needs vary, and chronic sleep deprivation (＜5 hours) consistently increases mortality."

题目：
Which statement is true according to the study?
A. All adults need exactly 8 hours of sleep.
B. Sleeping 6-7 hours is optimal for everyone.
C. Short sleep duration always raises mortality.
D. Mortality risk differs by sleep duration group.

易错点：考生可能因"15% lower risk"而误选B的绝对化表述。
解析：原文强调个体差异（A项"all"、B项"everyone"错误），C项"always"与"chronic deprivation"条件矛盾，D项准确概括分组比较结果。

案例2
段落：
"Gene editing using CRISPR-Cas9 corrected sickle cell mutations in 89% of treated cells during laboratory trials. Despite this success, scientists warned that off-target effects could occur, necessitating rigorous safety testing before clinical application."

题目：
What does the paragraph imply about CRISPR-Cas9?
A. It is 100% effective in curing sickle cell disease.
B. Off-target effects are impossible to detect.
C. Clinical use requires further validation.
D. Laboratory trials are unnecessary for gene editing.

易错点：考生可能因"89% success"而忽略后续警告。
解析：A项"100%"、B项"impossible"、D项"unnecessary"均为绝对化错误，C项对应"rigorous safety testing"的必要性。

总结：细节事实题解题三步法

精准定位：划出题干核心名词（如疾病名、研究结论），避免使用地名、时间等辅助信息定位。

同义匹配：将选项与原文进行词汇/句式转换对比，警惕绝对化词汇和逻辑跳跃。

验证排除：对剩余选项逐一核对原文依据，优先选择有数据或研究名称支持的选项。

通过系统分析陷阱类型与真题案例，考生可显著提升细节题准确率，避免"读懂文章却选错答案"的困境。