Which type of waiver allows an individual to go forward with questioning while acknowledging limitations on the questions asked?

The correct choice identifies a conditional waiver as the type that permits individuals to proceed with questioning while explicitly recognizing certain limitations on the scope of the questions. This means that the individual consents to answering questions but does so with an understanding that their responses are confined to certain parameters or contexts, which can help protect their rights or interests.

Conditional waivers are particularly relevant in legal contexts, where individuals may choose to cooperate under specific stipulations, thus allowing for productive dialogue while also safeguarding certain legal protections. This nuanced approach ensures that while engagement is allowed, it is not limitless, thereby maintaining certain safeguards for the individual.

In contrast, an expressed waiver typically involves a clear and unequivocal agreement to waive a particular right without conditions. An implied waiver occurs when someone's actions suggest consent to waive rights, even when they haven’t explicitly stated so. An absolute waiver relinquishes any and all rights or claims without qualification, which would not permit any limitations. Understanding these distinctions clarifies why a conditional waiver is the most appropriate choice when limitations on questioning are acknowledged.