Identify Supporting Details in Informational Texts: SAT Reading Foundation Guide
Last Updated: 26 December 2025
Supporting details in informational texts are specific pieces of evidence—facts, statistics, examples, definitions, or cause-and-effect relationships—that prove or illustrate claims made by the author. On the SAT Reading section, you'll frequently encounter questions asking you to identify which detail from a passage best supports a given idea. At the foundation level (score band below 370), success means learning to distinguish concrete evidence from vague statements, related information, and personal opinions.
This skill is fundamental to all critical reading. When you can identify what counts as strong evidence in nonfiction writing—research articles, essays, reports, and explanatory texts—you're demonstrating the analytical thinking that colleges expect and that the SAT tests throughout the Information and Ideas strand.
What Are Supporting Details in Informational Texts?
In informational passages—nonfiction writing designed to explain, inform, argue, or analyze—supporting details provide the evidence base for the author's claims. Unlike literary texts where details describe characters and settings, informational text details prove points with verifiable information.
Types of Supporting Details in Nonfiction
Facts and Statistics: Objective, verifiable information including numbers, percentages, dates, measurements, and documented events. Example: "The program reduced dropout rates from 22% to 14% over three years." These provide measurable, concrete evidence.
Examples and Case Studies: Specific instances that illustrate general claims. When an author states a principle and then provides a concrete example, that example serves as supporting detail. Example: "Urban farms improve food access. In Detroit, neighborhood gardens now supply fresh produce to 5,000 residents who previously had no nearby grocery stores."
Research Findings: Results from studies, experiments, surveys, or academic investigations. These carry authority because they're based on systematic inquiry. Look for phrases like "research shows," "studies found," "data indicate," or "according to scientists."
Expert Statements: Quotes or paraphrases from credible authorities that provide evidence. These work as support when attributed to specific, qualified sources. Example: "According to Dr. Sarah Johnson, a climatologist at MIT, 'Arctic ice has declined 13% per decade since 1979.'"
Definitions and Explanations: When an author defines a key term or explains how something works, this background can serve as supporting detail for claims about that concept.
Cause-and-Effect Evidence: Details showing causal relationships—what led to what. Example: "Because the factory installed filters, air pollution in the area decreased 40%." The causal connection provides evidence of the filters' effectiveness.
The Four-Step Method for Finding Supporting Details
Step 1: Find the Main Point
Read the question carefully to identify the exact claim you need to support. Ask yourself: "What specific idea am I trying to prove?" Underline key words in the claim so you stay focused.
Step 2: Scan for Proof Words
Look for signal phrases that introduce evidence in informational texts. These "proof words" mark where supporting details appear:
Causation markers: "because," "since," "as a result," "therefore," "consequently," "due to"
Data markers: "studies show," "research found," "data indicate," "statistics reveal," "according to"
Quantifiers: Percentages, numbers, measurements, dates, frequencies ("40% of," "increased from X to Y")
Step 3: Match Detail to Claim
Compare each potential supporting detail to the specific claim. Ask: "Does this detail DIRECTLY prove this exact idea, or is it just related to the topic?" The strongest support is specific, measurable, and directly relevant.
Step 4: Eliminate Off-Topic Choices
Cross out details that are true but don't support the specific claim, details from the wrong part of the passage, vague statements without concrete evidence, and opinions presented without factual backing. The correct answer provides the most direct, concrete proof available.
For additional practice with this method, try the Supporting Details Quiz or review the Supporting Details Flashcards.
Worked Example 1
Passage:
Renewable energy sources are becoming increasingly cost-competitive with fossil fuels. The cost of solar energy has dropped dramatically over the past decade, declining by approximately 89% since 2010. Wind energy has also become more affordable, with costs falling about 70% during the same period. As a result, renewable energy now accounts for nearly 30% of global electricity generation. Industry analysts predict that by 2030, solar and wind will be the cheapest sources of electricity in most countries. This economic shift is driving rapid adoption even without government subsidies.
Question: Which detail from the passage best supports the claim that renewable energy has become more economically viable?
A) Renewable energy sources are becoming increasingly cost-competitive with fossil fuels.
B) The cost of solar energy has declined by approximately 89% since 2010.
C) Renewable energy now accounts for nearly 30% of global electricity generation.
D) Industry analysts predict that by 2030, solar and wind will be the cheapest electricity sources.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Find the main point. The claim is that renewable energy has become "more economically viable" (more affordable, cost-effective). I need concrete evidence of cost improvement.
Step 2: Scan for proof words. I see specific percentages and numbers: "89% since 2010" and "70% during the same period." These are quantifiable cost reductions. The phrase "As a result" signals a consequence of these changes.
Step 3: Match detail to claim. Economic viability means cost-effectiveness. Choice B states solar costs declined 89%—this is a specific, measurable decrease in price, directly proving economic improvement. Choice C mentions market share (30%) but doesn't prove affordability. Choice D is about future predictions, not current evidence.
Step 4: Eliminate off-topic.
• Choice A restates the claim without providing evidence—it's the conclusion, not the proof.
• Choice B provides specific percentage decrease in cost—this is concrete evidence of economic viability.
• Choice C shows adoption/market share, which could result from many factors, not just economics.
• Choice D is a prediction about the future, not evidence of current economic viability.
Answer: B — The 89% cost decline since 2010 is specific, measurable evidence that solar energy has become economically viable. This percentage directly proves affordability improvement, making it the strongest support for the claim.
Worked Example 2
Passage:
Regular physical activity significantly reduces the risk of chronic diseases. According to a comprehensive study published by the American Heart Association, individuals who engage in 150 minutes of moderate exercise per week have a 35% lower risk of developing heart disease compared to sedentary individuals. The same research found that exercise reduces the likelihood of type 2 diabetes by 40%. Beyond cardiovascular benefits, physical activity strengthens the immune system, improves mental health, and increases longevity. The World Health Organization estimates that physical inactivity is responsible for approximately 3.2 million deaths annually worldwide.
Question: Which detail provides the most specific evidence that exercise reduces chronic disease risk?
A) Regular physical activity significantly reduces the risk of chronic diseases.
B) Individuals who exercise 150 minutes weekly have 35% lower heart disease risk.
C) Physical activity strengthens the immune system and improves mental health.
D) Physical inactivity is responsible for approximately 3.2 million deaths annually.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Find the main point. The claim is that exercise "reduces chronic disease risk." I need specific evidence showing this reduction—ideally with measurements.
Step 2: Scan for proof words. I see "According to a comprehensive study" (research marker), specific percentages (35%, 40%), and a precise time frame (150 minutes per week). These signal concrete evidence.
Step 3: Match detail to claim. Chronic disease risk reduction needs measurable proof. Choice B provides: specific exercise amount (150 min/week) + specific risk reduction (35% lower heart disease). This quantifies the relationship between exercise and disease prevention. Choice C lists benefits but without measurements. Choice D discusses inactivity's harm but doesn't prove exercise reduces risk.
Step 4: Eliminate off-topic.
• Choice A is the general claim being made—it's the conclusion, not the supporting evidence.
• Choice B provides specific measurements: 150 minutes weekly exercise → 35% risk reduction. This is concrete proof.
• Choice C mentions benefits vaguely ("strengthens," "improves") without quantifiable data.
• Choice D discusses consequences of inactivity, which is related but doesn't directly prove exercise reduces risk.
Answer: B — This detail provides the most specific evidence: exact exercise duration (150 min/week) linked to exact risk reduction (35% lower). This measurable, study-backed data directly proves exercise reduces chronic disease risk, making it the strongest supporting detail.
Guided Practice
Try these three questions with hints to build your skills. Use the hint if needed, then check your answer.
Passage:
Coral reefs support extraordinary marine biodiversity despite covering less than 1% of the ocean floor. Scientists estimate that coral reef ecosystems are home to approximately 25% of all marine species. These ecosystems provide essential services including coastal protection, fisheries support, and tourism revenue. A single reef system can support thousands of species of fish, invertebrates, and algae. However, rising ocean temperatures threaten these vital habitats, with some regions experiencing up to 50% coral mortality in recent years.
Question 1: Which detail best supports the claim that coral reefs have high biodiversity?
A) Coral reefs cover less than 1% of the ocean floor.
B) Scientists estimate coral reef ecosystems are home to approximately 25% of all marine species.
C) These ecosystems provide coastal protection and tourism revenue.
D) Rising ocean temperatures threaten these vital habitats.
Answer: B — The statistic that reefs contain 25% of all marine species despite covering less than 1% of ocean area directly proves high biodiversity. This percentage quantifies the concentration of species variety.
Passage:
Sleep deprivation negatively affects cognitive performance in significant ways. Research conducted at the University of Pennsylvania found that individuals who slept only six hours per night for two weeks performed as poorly on cognitive tests as people who had been completely sleep-deprived for 48 hours. Memory consolidation, attention span, and decision-making abilities all decline with insufficient sleep. Students who get adequate sleep before exams consistently score higher than those who stay up late studying. The National Sleep Foundation recommends that adults get 7-9 hours of sleep per night for optimal functioning.
Question 2: Which detail provides the strongest evidence that sleep deprivation impairs cognitive function?
A) Sleep deprivation negatively affects cognitive performance in significant ways.
B) Memory consolidation, attention span, and decision-making abilities decline with insufficient sleep.
C) People who slept six hours for two weeks performed as poorly as those sleep-deprived for 48 hours.
D) The National Sleep Foundation recommends 7-9 hours of sleep per night.
Answer: C — This University of Pennsylvania research finding provides specific, comparative evidence: six hours nightly for two weeks = cognitive performance equivalent to 48-hour total deprivation. This measurable equivalence from actual research most strongly proves impairment.
Passage:
Electric vehicles produce significantly lower lifetime emissions than gasoline-powered cars, even when accounting for battery production. A recent analysis by the International Energy Agency calculated that over a vehicle's lifetime, an electric car produces approximately 50% less carbon dioxide than a comparable gasoline vehicle in most countries. In regions where electricity comes primarily from renewable sources, the emissions reduction can exceed 70%. The environmental advantage increases as electrical grids become cleaner. Manufacturing EV batteries does require substantial energy, but this initial emission cost is offset within the first few years of driving.
Question 3: Which detail best supports the claim that electric vehicles have lower lifetime emissions than gasoline cars?
A) Electric vehicles produce significantly lower lifetime emissions than gasoline-powered cars.
B) An electric car produces approximately 50% less CO₂ than a gasoline vehicle over its lifetime.
C) In regions with renewable electricity, emissions reduction can exceed 70%.
D) Manufacturing EV batteries requires substantial energy.
Answer: B — The International Energy Agency's calculation that EVs produce approximately 50% less CO₂ over their lifetime directly proves lower lifetime emissions with a specific, measurable percentage from a credible source.
Independent Practice
Test your mastery with these five questions. Try to answer them without hints, then check your answers below.
Passage for Questions 4-5:
Urban tree canopy coverage provides substantial economic and health benefits to cities. A study of ten major U.S. cities found that urban trees provide approximately $18 billion annually in benefits including air pollution removal, stormwater management, and energy savings. Trees reduce ambient temperatures through shade and evapotranspiration, lowering urban heat island effects by 2-5°F in summer. Each tree removes an average of 48 pounds of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere per year while also filtering pollutants like ozone and particulate matter. Cities with higher tree coverage report lower rates of respiratory illness and reduced cooling costs.
Question 4: Which detail best supports the claim that urban trees provide economic value?
A) Urban tree canopy coverage provides substantial economic and health benefits to cities.
B) A study found that urban trees provide approximately $18 billion annually in benefits.
C) Trees reduce ambient temperatures by 2-5°F in summer.
D) Each tree removes an average of 48 pounds of CO₂ per year.
Question 5: Which detail provides measurable evidence of trees' environmental impact?
A) Trees reduce urban heat island effects.
B) Each tree removes an average of 48 pounds of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere per year.
C) Cities with higher tree coverage report lower rates of respiratory illness.
D) Trees filter pollutants like ozone and particulate matter.
Passage for Questions 6-7:
Early childhood education programs yield long-term social and economic benefits. The Perry Preschool Project, a landmark longitudinal study, tracked participants for over 40 years and found that those who attended quality preschool had higher earnings, were more likely to graduate high school, and had lower rates of criminal involvement than the control group. Specifically, preschool participants earned an average of $42,000 more over their lifetimes. The return on investment was calculated at $7 for every $1 spent on the program, primarily through increased tax revenue and reduced social service costs. These findings have influenced education policy worldwide.
Question 6: Which detail best supports the claim that early childhood education has long-term economic benefits?
A) Early childhood education programs yield long-term social and economic benefits.
B) Participants were tracked for over 40 years in the Perry Preschool Project.
C) Preschool participants earned an average of $42,000 more over their lifetimes.
D) These findings have influenced education policy worldwide.
Question 7: Which detail provides the strongest evidence of program cost-effectiveness?
A) The Perry Preschool Project was a landmark longitudinal study.
B) Participants had higher earnings and lower criminal involvement.
C) The return on investment was $7 for every $1 spent on the program.
D) Preschool participants were more likely to graduate high school.
Passage for Question 8:
Honeybee populations have declined dramatically in recent decades, raising concerns about agricultural productivity. Bees pollinate approximately one-third of the food crops humans consume, including fruits, vegetables, and nuts valued at over $15 billion annually in the United States alone. Colony Collapse Disorder, first identified in 2006, has caused some beekeepers to lose 30-90% of their hives. Scientists attribute the decline to multiple factors: pesticide exposure, habitat loss, parasites, and disease. Without intervention, the loss of pollination services could significantly disrupt food production and increase prices for consumers.
Question 8: Which detail most effectively supports the claim that honeybees are critical to agriculture?
A) Honeybee populations have declined dramatically in recent decades.
B) Bees pollinate approximately one-third of the food crops humans consume.
C) Colony Collapse Disorder has caused beekeepers to lose 30-90% of their hives.
D) Scientists attribute the decline to pesticide exposure, habitat loss, parasites, and disease.
Answer Key: Independent Practice
Question 4: B — The $18 billion annually in benefits is a specific, measurable economic value provided by urban trees. This dollar amount directly proves economic value, making it the strongest evidence.
Question 5: B — "48 pounds of CO₂ removed per tree per year" is specific, measurable environmental impact data. This quantifies exactly what each tree accomplishes, providing concrete evidence of environmental benefit.
Question 6: C — The $42,000 average lifetime earnings increase is specific, measurable economic benefit data from the study. This dollar amount directly proves long-term economic impact on individuals.
Question 7: C — The $7 return for every $1 invested is a specific cost-benefit ratio that directly proves cost-effectiveness. This ROI calculation provides the strongest evidence of program economic efficiency.
Question 8: B — "Bees pollinate approximately one-third of food crops humans consume" directly proves their critical agricultural role. This proportion shows how much of our food supply depends on bee pollination, making it essential evidence of their importance.
Common Traps to Avoid
Trap 1: "True But Unrelated" Details
A statement can be factually accurate according to the passage but still not support the specific claim asked about. Always verify: Does this detail prove THIS EXACT CLAIM, or is it just other information from the passage? Example: If the claim is "The program was expensive," a detail about the program's effectiveness is related but doesn't prove cost.
Trap 2: "Too General" Statements
Vague, broad statements don't provide strong support. Example: "The experiment was successful" is too general. "The experiment increased efficiency by 34%" is specific, measurable support. Always prefer concrete details with numbers, examples, or specific facts over vague language like "significant," "many," or "various."
Trap 3: "Opinion Not Supported by Facts"
Not all statements in informational texts are facts. Authors sometimes express opinions or interpretations. These can't serve as supporting details unless backed by evidence. Example: "This is the best approach" is opinion. "This approach reduced costs 40% more than alternatives" is fact-backed evidence. Look for verifiable information, not judgments.
Trap 4: "Wrong Paragraph" Information
Sometimes passages discuss multiple topics in different paragraphs. Make sure the supporting detail you choose comes from the relevant section and directly addresses the claim. Don't be fooled by interesting details from unrelated parts of the passage. Stay focused on what supports the specific claim.
Trap 5: Restating the Claim
The supporting detail must provide NEW evidence, not just restate the claim in different words. Example: Claim = "Exercise improves health." TRAP = "Physical activity provides health benefits" (restates claim). CORRECT = "Exercise reduces heart disease risk by 35%" (provides specific evidence).
Trap 6: Future Predictions vs. Current Evidence
If the claim is about present or past conditions, don't choose details about future predictions or possibilities. Example: Claim = "Solar energy is currently affordable." A detail about future cost projections doesn't prove current affordability. Match the time frame of evidence to the claim's time frame.
Performance Calculator
Track your practice performance and receive personalized recommendations for improving your supporting details identification skills.
SAT Reading Practice Session Calculator
Your Results:
Why You Can Trust This Lesson
This lesson is developed specifically for NUM8ERS tutoring students in Dubai and across the UAE, aligned with official College Board SAT specifications for the Information and Ideas testing domain. Content is based on the official SAT Reading and Writing section guidelines and follows the same structure and difficulty level as foundation-level questions on the digital SAT. All practice passages and questions are original and designed to match the cognitive demand, format, and evidence types tested on the actual exam. The four-step method has been refined through classroom use with hundreds of foundation-level students. This resource is regularly updated to reflect current SAT format and best practices for identifying supporting details in informational texts.
Frequently Asked Questions
What makes a supporting detail "strong" in informational texts?
Strong supporting details are specific, measurable, and directly relevant to the claim. They include concrete facts, statistics, research findings, or specific examples rather than vague statements. For example, "Sales increased 45%" is stronger than "Sales increased significantly" because it provides verifiable, precise information.
How do I know if something is a fact or an opinion?
Facts can be verified through observation, measurement, or documentation. Opinions reflect judgment, interpretation, or belief. Ask: "Can this be objectively proven?" If yes, it's a fact. Watch for judgment words like "best," "should," "most important," or "better"—these usually signal opinion. The SAT prefers factual evidence over opinion as supporting details.
What are "proof words" and why are they important?
Proof words are signal phrases that introduce evidence in informational texts: "for example," "because," "studies show," "data indicate," "as a result." These markers help you quickly locate where supporting details appear in passages. Learning to scan for these phrases speeds up your ability to find relevant evidence.
Can examples serve as supporting details?
Yes! Specific examples are a type of supporting detail. When an author provides a concrete instance or case study that illustrates a general claim, that example serves as evidence. The key is that the example must be specific and directly relevant to the claim being supported.
What if multiple answer choices seem correct?
Choose the most specific and most direct support. The SAT often includes answers that are related to the topic or partially relevant. The correct answer will provide the strongest, most concrete proof with the clearest connection to the exact claim in the question. Look for measurable data and direct relevance.
How do I avoid the "true but unrelated" trap?
Always verify that the detail proves the specific claim asked about, not just provides related information. After selecting an answer, ask: "Does this detail directly prove THIS EXACT IDEA?" If it's just interesting information from the passage that doesn't support the particular claim, it's a trap.
Should I read the entire passage before looking at questions?
For supporting details questions, read the question first to know what claim needs support, then scan the passage for relevant evidence. This focused approach is more efficient than trying to remember everything from the passage. Look for proof words and specific details related to the claim.
How long should I spend on each supporting details question?
Aim for 60-75 seconds per question at foundation level. This gives you time to read the question, scan for evidence, evaluate choices, and select the best answer. As you improve, you can work toward 45-60 seconds while maintaining accuracy.
About the Author
NUM8ERS Tutoring — By Admin
Educational Content Developer | SAT/ACT Test Preparation Specialist
Last Updated: 26 December 2025
This lesson is part of the comprehensive SAT Reading & Writing curriculum used by NUM8ERS tutoring in Dubai and across the UAE. Content aligns with College Board standards and is regularly updated to reflect current SAT format and best practices for foundation-level students.
For additional SAT Reading practice and official test preparation resources, visit the College Board Digital SAT Practice and Preparation page.
NUM8ERS.COM Looking for tutoring classes | best tutoring club in UAE | Online & In-Person Classes | Top 1% tutors in DUBAI |
204, API Business Suites, Al Barsha 1, Dubai.
+971-52-790-6688 (Call)
+971-04-399-1044
[email protected]
12:00 PM - 09:00 PM