Mario is writing an argument supporting a proposed bike-helmet law. Mario includes a personal example explaining that he once had a bike accident and avoided serious injury because he was wearing a helmet. If Mario revises his argument, he should

Mario’s personal experience makes the argument relatable, but one person’s experience does not establish that a helmet law would benefit cyclists generally. He should support it with well-researched facts as well, such as evidence about how helmets reduce impact injuries. That makes D, balancing the personal example with factual examples, the strongest revision; adding more personal stories alone would still leave the argument short on broader evidence.

AI-written and checked against the verified answer.