A natural experiment occurred when a lottery randomly assigned some low-income individuals to receive housing vouchers. Years later, voucher recipients showed no overall improvement in employment or earnings compared to non-recipients. However, children who moved to lower-poverty neighborhoods before age 13 showed significantly higher college attendance and earnings in adulthood.
The passage suggests that
the timing of an intervention may affect its long-term outcomes
housing vouchers have no effects on anyone
adults and children respond identically to changes in environment
lottery-based studies cannot provide useful information
Correct Answer: A
Choice A is the best answer. Children under 13 showed benefits that others didn't.
- Context clues: No overall adult improvement; children "before age 13" showed "significantly higher" outcomes.
- Meaning: The age at intervention determined whether it helped.
- Verify: The contrast between child and adult outcomes highlights timing's importance.
💡 Strategy: When effects differ by age or timing, infer timing is a key moderator.
Choice B is incorrect because children who moved young showed significant benefits. Choice C is incorrect because adults showed no improvement while young children did. Choice D is incorrect because the lottery created a valuable "natural experiment."