The interviewees (I-1 and I-2) from OC1 cited resonance as contributing to the differences in 270 basicity. However, neither student produced a correct resonance structure, and neither student identified the more basic nitrogen. Both students drew resonance structures that violate the octet rule. For I-2, the presence of the double bond was a resource the student used to propose the resonance argument. Specifically, the student (I2) noted: "I chose the top corner at first because I thought that since the double bond is right there, there could be more resonance."