What is a "cross-examination" in a debate?

A "cross-examination" in a debate is a specific period for questioning between debaters where one debater gets to interrogate another about their arguments and evidence presented. This phase is crucial because it allows for clarification, challenges, and deeper exploration of the points raised during the debate. The intent is to critically assess the opponent's claims, expose weaknesses, or reinforce one’s own position by highlighting contradictions or inaccuracies.

During cross-examination, the questioning can reveal the strength of an argument or its vulnerabilities, providing an opportunity for dynamic engagement rather than merely presenting information. This interaction can greatly influence the perception of the arguments by the judges or audience, making it a vital component of the debate process that goes beyond simply delivering prepared speeches.

Contextually, the other choices do not accurately define cross-examination; it is not an entertainment session, a summary of arguments, or a final speech delivery method. Instead, it is a tailored dialogue aimed at scrutiny and debate refinement, solidifying option B as the correct understanding of cross-examination in the context of a debate.