SAT Detail questions, like Main Idea questions, are a subset of what the College Board categorizes as Central Ideas and Details. We noted how the main idea of a passage is typically found at the end; a key detail, meanwhile, is often found nearby, particularly in the second-to-last sentence. This is not an ironclad rule, but the SAT will often focus on details that are particularly important in allowing a writer or researcher to draw a particular conclusion. Since the first couple of sentences are usually introductory, laying the groundwork for a conclusion about a certain topic, the end of the paragraph is usually a more fruitful place to look.
In 2021, archaeologist Jamal Saidi surveyed coastal ruins in northern Tunisia that were once part of the Roman Empire. Among the discoveries was a series of underground cisterns that had been plastered and sealed, apparently to prevent saltwater intrusion. Near these cisterns, Saidi found fragments of imported amphorae typically used to transport olive oil and wine. While these goods were traded widely, their presence so close to sophisticated water-storage systems suggests they were used by a small, stable community rather than by passing merchants. Saidi concluded that this site may have been a regional trade depot with permanent staff.
According to the passage, what led Saidi to believe that the site had permanent residents?
A. The use of plaster in the cisterns indicates advanced engineering.
B. The imported amphorae show that wine and oil were traded in the area.
C. The combination of water infrastructure and stored goods implies a stable presence.
D. Cisterns were always located in military garrisons throughout the Roman Empire.
Detail questions will typically focus on supporting details (details that support the main idea); though it may be the case that all the details mentioned contribute to the passage’s argument, typically one detail in particular will directly support the claim. More often than not, that detail is located right next to the main idea.
For example, this question alludes to the main idea: that there were people living permanently at the site studied by Saidi. The question is, what detail supports that claim? If we follow the strategy implied above and search close to the main idea, we’ll be focusing on the second-to-last sentence (since the main claim is in the last sentence). There we learn about the “sophisticated water-storage systems,” pointing to the likelihood of a “small, stable community.” So we should find an answer that mentions these storage systems. After all, only a community with some kind of permanence would require a storage system.
Two wrong answer choices, A and B, might be tempting because they do mention details included in the passage. However, those details are not used to directly support the claim about the permanent community. Meanwhile, choice D goes beyond anything mentioned in the passage, discussing the entire Roman Empire. Answer C is the one we want; it includes the mention of “water infrastructure,” which is another way of referring to the water storage system, as well as “stored goods,” which refers to some of the details mentioned in other answer choices but only here appropriately connected to the water system.
The main variations in Detail questions have to do with whether the passage is asking about a detail supporting the main idea or some other specific bit of information. Don’t worry; the question stem will always give you sufficient guidance about what sort of detail you’re supposed to find.
Answer this: what does the U in the QUICKER Method stand for?
UNDERSTAND the question type.
Botanist Carlos Viera studied a rare desert moss that thrives in areas with rocky shade but not in fully exposed sunlight. Viera wanted to understand the relationship between the amount of sunlight received by the moss and the health of the organism. His experiments showed that even a small increase in direct sunlight caused the moss to lose moisture and stop growing.
Based on the text, what environmental condition harms the desert moss?
A. High winds that scatter the moss spores
B. Complete darkness caused by deep shade
C. Direct sunlight that dries out the moss
D. Large amounts of nighttime rainfall
The answer is C. Every sentence of the passage mentions sunlight–a great clue to how important sunlight is as a factor in this experiment. We can be almost certain, even with a quick glance, that only the answer mentioning sunlight can be correct. It’s worth a quick look at the answer choice mentioning “complete darkness”; perhaps it’s the absence of sunlight that harms the desert moss. But the last sentence makes clear that more sunlight harms the moss, not less.
Historian Naomi Carr reviewed 18th-century letters exchanged between merchants in London and the Caribbean during a time when the British Empire traded widely in the islands of North America. She found that while sugar and rum were expected topics, many letters also included detailed notes on local weather and illnesses. Reflecting on these findings, Carr argues that these added observations helped business owners anticipate shipping delays.
What point does Carr make about the content of merchant letters?
A. Letters mainly focused on trade goods like sugar and rum.
B. Weather and health updates were important for making business decisions.
C. Business owners in London did not care about Caribbean conditions.
D. Trade letters from the 18th century were generally impersonal.
The answer is B. When the question says “what point does Carr make,” there is some similarity to a Main Idea question; for this reason, we should look at the last sentence of the passage. That sentence refers to key information with the phrase “these added observations”–information that “helped business owners”. So, to put together the idea, we need to read back a sentence to find what “these added observations” refers to. The previous sentence mentions “detailed notes on local weather and illnesses” that were “also included.”
Combining these ideas, we can see that the extra notes on weather and illness were helpful to the merchants. The right answer links this information (“updates”) with its importance for the merchants’ decisions. The other answer choices either focus on tone (“impersonal”, “did not care”) or the main topics like sugar and rum. Remember that it was not the expected topics but rather the additional information that is the focus of the paragraph’s central claim.
After examining shipping records from the 1500s, economic historian Youssef Idris noted that ships carrying fewer cannons often traveled in groups, while heavily armed ships usually sailed alone. In addition, the shipping records showed the ships with fewer cannons communicating with other ships en route more frequently than did ships with heavier cannon loads. Idris proposed that ships with lighter defenses relied on each other for protection.
What does the passage indicate about lightly armed ships?
A. They were more likely to sail solo to avoid attention.
B. They stayed near ports rather than crossing oceans.
C. Their safety depended heavily on traveling in a fleet.
D. They issued more messages regarding their trade cargo than did more heavily protected ships.
The answer is C. The fact that the conclusion mentions “protection” points to several answers–Choice A mentions the idea of avoiding attention, and Choice B talks about staying near ports. Both of these ideas imply a concern for safety or being protected, but neither matches the details of the passage. Only Choice C describes a “fleet”, which is simply a group of ships. This answer captures the idea of a lightly armed ship needing more protection from other ships. Choice D, meanwhile, is completely off-topic, focusing on the ships’ trade cargo rather than their relative degree of armament and their need for protection.
Linguist Carla Nguyen analyzed communication patterns in a multilingual neighborhood in Toronto, Canada. She observed that residents often adjusted their language depending on the listener—not just switching between English and French, but also between formal and informal tones, idioms, and even accent. For instance, a speaker might adopt a Caribbean-influenced English dialect with one neighbor and revert to academic Canadian English at work. Nguyen’s recordings further revealed that many residents were unaware of these shifts when asked about their speech. She argues that code-switching operates not just as a conscious strategy but also as an automatic social adaptation.
Which detail appears most important in leading Nguyen to theorize that code-switching is not always conscious?
A. Many residents in the neighborhood spoke more than two languages fluently.
B. Speakers adjusted their language depending on location and context.
C. Residents often denied making noticeable language shifts in interviews.
D. The Caribbean dialect was the most common informal register used.
The answer is C. This Detail question asks us to find the support for only part of the author’s main conclusion, so let’s identify that part first. The phrase “not always conscious” in the question stem must refer to the “automatic social adaptation” in the last sentence, because the strategy referred to in the other part of that sentence is conscious. But what detail points to this unconscious adaptation? As is often the case, we find our answer in the previous sentence: “many residents were unaware …” In other words, the Toronto residents were “code-switching” without even realizing it.
Although the use of the word “denied” in choice C, might seem too strong, the passage says that they were unaware of their code-switching “when asked about their speech.” In other words, when questions, they said they hadn’t done so even though they had. So this answer fits the residents’ level of awareness as well as the fact that the evidence came forth in interviews. Answer choices A and B refer to parts of the passage, but speaking two languages and adjusting their language are ideas neither of which addresses the idea of not being conscious of something. Choice D gets far too narrow, focusing on a specific dialect and saying nothing about this unconscious switch.
During a paleontological dig in Argentina, researchers uncovered fossilized tracks of a small, birdlike dinosaur. The tracks, spaced just inches apart, formed a zigzagging pattern that suggested sudden starts and stops. Interestingly, the fossil site also contained footprints of a larger predator species, preserved on the same layer of sediment. The two sets of tracks came close at several points but never overlapped. The research team proposed that the smaller dinosaur might have been dodging a predator, using quick, erratic movement to escape.
Which detail points to the likelihood of the researchers’ theory about predator avoidance?
A. The tracks were found in the same sediment layer as those of a larger dinosaur.
B. The zigzagging pattern indicates changes in direction and speed.
C. The birdlike dinosaur’s tracks appeared to approach those of the other dinosaur but never overlapped.
D. The tracks were preserved in sediment instead of volcanic ash.
The answer is B. To understand the best detail here, we need to note what the research team concludes: not only that the smaller dinosaur might have been avoiding a predator, but also that it was likely “using quick, erratic movement to escape.” This particular detail about the researchers’ theory helps us distinguish between choices B and C here. Choice C mentions a specific detail that the passage brings up in the evidence for the researchers’ theory. But this choice is not as strong as choice B because it doesn’t as thoroughly explain the “quick, erratic movement.” By mentioning changes in speed and direction, choice B addresses that idea more directly. Meanwhile, choice A’s detail may seem somewhat relevant, but it’s not as direct as the right answer, and in any case, choice A’s detail is not specifically proven in the passage. Choice D speaks about an irrelevant detail; it’s true that the prints were found in a “layer of sediment,” but that is simply a background detail.
Sign up for free to take 10 quiz questions on this topic