A model and a completed sales grid produce nearly identical figures. What does this establish?
Correct Answer
D) That two lines of evidence agree, which is corroboration
Why this is correct: The governing concept is corroboration of evidence. When two independent lines of analysis (like a model and a traditional sales comparison) produce similar value indications, it strengthens the credibility of the conclusion. However, it does not prove the conclusion is correct, as both methods could share a common error. Why the other choices are wrong: "That the conclusion is certainly correct" is wrong; agreement increases confidence but does not guarantee accuracy. "That the grid may now be omitted from the report" is wrong; the supporting analysis must still be reported. "That the model may be relied on for future work" is wrong; appropriateness must be re-evaluated for each assignment. Exam tip: Agreement between methods is supportive evidence, not conclusive proof. Always explain your reasoning.
Why This Is the Correct Answer
Two lines of evidence agreeing is corroboration, which strengthens confidence in the conclusion without proving it. That framing is honest about what convergence can and cannot do, and it matches how reconciliation actually works, weighing indications rather than counting them. It also leaves the appraiser's obligation intact to explain why the conclusion is credible. If the two methods share data or assumptions, the corroboration is weaker than it appears, which is worth saying in the report.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A: That the conclusion is certainly correct
Certainty is not available from any appraisal method, since a value opinion is an opinion about a most probable price rather than a measurement of a fixed quantity. Two methods can share a common error and agree confidently on a wrong answer, which happens whenever a bad data source feeds both. The word certainly is the disqualifier.
Option B: That the grid may now be omitted from the report
The report must contain sufficient information for intended users to understand the analyses and the reasoning that led to the opinion, so a supporting analysis cannot be dropped because another one agreed with it. Omitting the grid would leave the reader unable to evaluate how the conclusion was reached. Convergence is a reason to present both, not to hide one.
Option C: That the model may be relied on for future work
Whether a model is appropriate depends on the assignment: the property type, the market area, the data available, and the intended use. A model that performed well on one subject may be badly specified for the next, particularly if the next property sits in a different submarket or product class. Treating one good result as a blanket authorization skips the competency and scope of work analysis each assignment requires.
Agreement Is a Vote, Not a Proof
When two methods agree, ask what they had in common before you celebrate. Shared data means a shared blind spot. Independent evidence corroborates; dependent evidence just echoes.
How to use: In any question about two methods agreeing or disagreeing, pick the answer that treats the result as evidence to be interpreted. Reject options claiming proof, permitting omission of work, or generalizing to future assignments.
Exam Tip
Reconciliation is never averaging and never counting votes. If an option says the appraiser may skip explanation because the numbers matched, it is wrong.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Treating convergence between methods as proof rather than support
- -Omitting a supporting analysis from the report because another agreed with it
- -Reusing a model across assignments without reassessing its fit
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
Convergence between two analyses is evidence about reliability, and how much evidence depends entirely on how independent the two analyses really are. A statistical model and a hand-built sales grid can look independent while sharing a great deal: the same MLS data, the same set of recent sales, the same unverified condition ratings, the same market area definition, and the same unadjusted concessions. If both rest on a common flawed input, they will agree with each other and both be wrong, which is why agreement raises confidence without establishing correctness. Reconciliation in appraisal is precisely this judgment: the appraiser weighs each indication by the quality and quantity of the data behind it and the applicability of the technique to the assignment, then explains the weight assigned. Convergence makes that explanation easier but does not replace it, and the reasoning behind both indications still has to appear in the report.
Background Knowledge
You need the reconciliation process and the criteria for weighing indications: appropriateness of the approach to the assignment, accuracy of the data, and quantity of evidence supporting each indication. You should also know that reporting requirements call for enough detail that intended users can understand the reasoning, and that the appraiser must analyze whether any tool is appropriate for the specific assignment.
Real-World Application
An appraiser's regression indication lands within one percent of her grid conclusion. She notes in the report that both drew on the same MLS dataset and therefore share exposure to any concession misreporting, presents both analyses in full, and explains why she weighted the grid more heavily given her verified condition data.
More Emerging Methods Questions
How does an alternative inspection method affect the appraiser's disclosure obligations?
A collector's photographs show a condition the appraiser believes needs specialist assessment. What is the appropriate step?
What responsibility does an appraiser retain for an error originating in a third-party database?
Under current USPAP guidance, what is the output of an automated valuation model before an appraiser analyzes it?
Which assignment type still requires the appraiser to develop an opinion of value?
A model returns an estimate far from the appraiser's own conclusion. What is the appropriate response?
What does it mean that a tool cannot comply with USPAP?
An appraiser is asked to review an assignment where an AVM supplied the value. What does the review examine?
Why is the date a data extract was pulled worth recording in the workfile?
A desktop appraisal is best described as an assignment completed how?
People Also Study
Real Estate Market
13.6% of exam
Property Description
11.8% of exam
Land or Site Valuation
4.5% of exam
Sales Comparison Approach
16.4% of exam
Cost Approach
13.6% of exam