[Cboldt]

That, plus the formatting, should be enough of a difference to at minimum throw out the presumption of validity, I would think. Would you agree?

You got me thinking though. Why would Mae's be different? You know what I think? I think some lawyer read the model, and decided "This can't be right. Who would do without water, but take food?" IOW, the lawyer read the include/exclude language "backwards." So, being a doer-of-good-deeds, a lawyer (who has just demonstrated critical confusion) changes the document so that a person who DID check the second box is saying, "give me food, but don't give me water." The lawyer figured the second box, revised, meant "give me water but not food."

That does evidence the liklihood of critical confusion. But it doesn't prove that Mae was critically confused. And even though the change "is material," it isn't material for Mae, because she didn't check that box.

[supercat]

That does evidence the liklihood of critical confusion. But it doesn't prove that Mae was critically confused. And even though the change "is material," it isn't material for Mae, because she didn't check that box.

When faced with a multiple-choice selection, the wording of selections not chosen will often influence people's interpretation of the question asked. If the form had the correct wording for choice #2, the selection posed thereby would seem odd to a careful reader. Such a person would then try to figure out how the form could be interpreted so that selection #2 made sense, and would then realize that the form as formatted is horribly ambiguous.

The parenthetical (check the option desired) is not part of the meaning of the main text; if the person filling out the form checks an option, it is clear that they understood the intended meaning even in the absense of such language. But the other change in language is on a material part of the form, and as such changes its meaning.

As a couple of examples where unchecked box labels can change the meaning of checked boxes, consider the following:

Marital status: ( ) Single ( ) Married

versus

Marital status: ( ) Single ( ) Married ( ) Widowed ( ) Divorced ( ) Separated

or

Would you like to purchase a CDW? (If you don't you could be liable for thousands of dollars in case of an accident. Are you sure you want to take that risk?)

• Yes
• No, I won't want the risk--I'll take the CDW

versus

Would you like to purchase a CDW? (If you don't you could be liable for thousands of dollars in case of an accident. Are you sure you want to take that risk?)

• Yes
• No, I won't want the CDW--I'll take the risk.

Note that in the latter case, the meaning of the "yes" option is completely changed by the wording of the "no" option.