Narrative as a series of questions and answers
Cause and effect/question and answer
Continuity and connections:
Narrative context: Our scene takes place in the woods on a summer day. Laura, a teenager, is looking for her older brother Tom. At this point in the story we have not yet seen Tom, so we don't know what he looks like.
Version 1:
Laura enters the woods. Question:
Where is Tom?
Laura stops a few yards from
a clearing. New Question: What has she found?
Tom and a girl lying naked
on a blanket. Answer: Laura has found her brother.
Version 2:
Laura enters the woods. Question:
Where is Tom?
Tom and a girl lying naked
on a blanket. Answer: Tom is here. New
Question: Will Laura find Tom?
Laura stops a few yards from
a clearing. Answer: Laura has found Tom.
In this version, the viewer shares the secret by knowing that Tom is nearby in a compromising position. This editing pattern places an answer before the question, thereby creating suspense.
Version 3:
In this version, we'll change the narrative context again. This time we know that Tom's sister is looking for him. However, we haven't seen her in the story at this point and don't know what she looks like. Tom's whereabouts are unknown - as the scene opens we receive our first answer.
Tom and a girl lying naked
on a blanket. Answer: Tom is here.
A girl enters the woods. Question:
Is this Laura?
Laura stops a few yards from
the clearing. Answer: This is Laura.
By revealing Tom in a compromising position in the opening shot, a suspenseful situation is established for the remainder of the scene. When Laura enters the scene the fuse is lit, and we know that a potentially embarassing meeting is possible. Hitchcock often sets up a scene this way, by placing the audience in a privileged (and uncomfortable) position by providing them with information that the protagonist desperately needs but cannot obtain.
In addition to altering the order of question and answer patterns, the rhythm and timing of the patterns can be varied by withholding some or all of the expected narrative information. It is also possible to have more than one question raised in a single shot.

In this case the look in the first shot would ordinarily be answered by a shot of the gun. However, the answer has been postponed while shots 2 and 3 show the man turning on the light.
In this version teh cut on the look has been reversed so that we see the object of attention before the look.

The question in these shots is who is the person coming through the door and why. The partial answer is that it is a man, and in frame 3 we see that he has a finger missing. In frame 4 we learn that he is there to find the gun.
In frame one two questions are raised: who is coming through the door and whose hand emerges from behind the door? When the person enters the room in frame 2 we get a partial answer, learning that the persion is a man. But frame 2 also raises the question of the pool of blood on the floor. In frame 3 the man puts his hand on the sheet of paper. This answers our question about the man since we now know he is the man with the missing finger. But a new question is raised - why has part of the letter been removed? In frame 4 we learn that a gun is on the floor. But we are left with the question of who is the woman standing over the gun?
We can start to imagine the sequence of images as an overlapping chain of causal relationships.