AP Psych EBQ: How to handle the Evidence-Based Question

The Evidence-Based Question (EBQ) is the second of two free-response questions on the redesigned AP Psychology exam. It replaces part of the older two-part FRQ and tests something the old format didn't: Your ability to build an argument using multiple research sources.

This article walks through what the EBQ asks, the 7-point rubric, and a strategy built around each rubric point.

The EBQ presents you with a psychology-related claim or question, followed by three sources, each summarizing a real, peer-reviewed research study. You're asked to take a position on the claim and defend it using evidence from at least two of the three sources.

Together they present converging or conflicting findings on the topic. The prompt asks something like: "Using at least two of the sources, argue whether social media use causes decreased attention span in adolescents." You take a side and support it.

The EBQ is worth 7 rubric points, and College Board suggests about 45 minutes for it, including 15 minutes to read the sources.

The claim point rewards a defensible position that responds directly to the prompt. Take a side. Fence-sitting arguments don't earn the point.

Example claims for the social media prompt above: "The available evidence supports the claim that heavy social media use is associated with decreased sustained attention in adolescents." Or: "The evidence does not consistently support a causal link between social media use and decreased attention span, though correlational findings suggest a relationship that warrants further study."

Both are defensible. Write one clear claim sentence in your introduction.

Parts B(i) and C(i) are worth 1 point each. Each needs one specific, relevant piece of evidence, cited to its source, and C(i) must come from a different source than B(i).

Specificity matters. "Source 1 found that social media harms attention" is vague. "Source 1's study of 250 adolescents over 6 months found a 15% decrease in sustained attention scores on a continuous performance task among heavy users" is specific.

You don't have to use all three sources. Two used well beats three used vaguely. The prompt specifies at least two, so pick the two that most clearly support your claim.

Reasoning rewards the connection between evidence and claim. It's not enough to cite two sources; you have to explain how each supports your argument.

A reliable shape: Devote one body paragraph to each source. In each paragraph, state what the source found (specific detail), then explain how it supports your claim. Words like "this supports the claim because..." or "this evidence indicates that..." signal reasoning to graders.

A common miss: Citing sources back-to-back without explaining their role in the argument. That can earn the evidence points but not the explanation points. Each explanation must use a psychological concept, theory or research finding from the course, and Part C(ii) must use a different one from Part B(ii).

There is no separate rubric point for an alternative perspective or limitation, but noting one briefly can sharpen your explanation. You don't have to reject your own argument; you have to show awareness that the argument has limits.

Examples: "However, Source 2 was correlational, so it cannot establish causation between social media use and attention decreases." Or: "An alternative interpretation is that adolescents with pre-existing attention difficulties are drawn to social media, rather than social media causing the attention differences."

One or two sentences is enough. Placement doesn't matter, but the end of a body paragraph or a brief separate paragraph both work well.

Given the rubric, a clean structure looks like:

Paragraph 1 (intro): State your claim in one sentence. Preview the two sources you'll use.

Paragraph 2: First source. State the finding specifically, then explain how it supports the claim.

Paragraph 3: Second source. State the finding specifically, then explain how it supports the claim.

Label your answer by part: The directions organize the EBQ as Part A (claim), Part B (first source) and Part C (second source), and you must cite the source in Parts B and C.

Optional short conclusion: Restate the claim.

Length isn't scored; complete, specific explanations are.

Recurring patterns. First, vague source citations. Naming a source without specific detail from it can cost the evidence point. Second, using all three sources shallowly instead of two deeply. Depth earns more than breadth here. Third, using the same psychological concept to explain both pieces of evidence (Part C needs a different one). Fourth, misreading a source (attributing a finding to Source 2 that in fact came from Source 3, for instance). Fifth, hedging the claim so much that no argument is defended.

One effective drill: Practice writing just the introduction and two body paragraph topic sentences for 3-4 sample EBQs. If those five sentences form a coherent argument, the full essay is on track.

The three sources on an EBQ are dense: Each summarizes a study's design, sample, method and findings. Reading them casually costs you points; reading them systematically saves time and improves your source selection.

A useful pattern: For each source, take 30 seconds to note four things in the margin. First, the research design (experimental, correlational, case study, etc.). Second, the key finding in one phrase. Third, the sample (who was studied and how many). Fourth, one obvious limitation (small sample, correlational design, self-report, WEIRD sample, and so on).

After you've noted these four things for all three sources, you have most of what you need. The two sources with the clearest findings that support one side of the prompt become your body-paragraph anchors. The limitation you noted on any source can seed your alternative-perspective paragraph. This whole scan takes about 90 seconds and saves you 5-10 minutes of re-reading during writing.