Reading - The general density dependence model can be

[RonPurewal]

(E) defending the validity of a particular study's conclusions

this paragraph starts out with "Some studies agree with the model. Others don't. Here's why the others don't."
so, basically every single word of this choice is wrong.

first, there is not "a particular study"—there are a plurality of studies on each side.

second, the author is certainly not aiming to "defend" anything. rather, the author's whole point is "Here is why this second group of studies is misguided."

[pij409]

(E) defending the validity of a particular study's conclusions

this paragraph starts out with "Some studies agree with the model. Others don't. Here's why the others don't."
so, basically every single word of this choice is wrong.

first, there is not "a particular study"—there are a plurality of studies on each side.

second, the author is certainly not aiming to "defend" anything. rather, the author's whole point is "Here is why this second group of studies is misguided."

Hi Ron,

sorry I still do not undertand.

I think there is "a particular study" about a general density dependence model.

And, what situation can I choose "defend" ?Even in the CR bold face, this word is always used.
I think that situation can perfectly use "defend"----paragraph starts out with "Some studies agree with the model. Others don't. Here's why the others don't."
I do not want to make a same mistake in RC and CR.

Thanks a lot!!

[Sage Pearce-Higgins]

The passage mentions "several studies" and "other studies", so clearly we're dealing with more than one study here. That kind of singular / plural mismatch is a great way to eliminate RC answer choices.

As for defend, this would refer to argumentative language found both in RC and CR, with which the author makes a claim and provides reasons (defends) it. In this passage we might say that the author defends the general density dependence model in the face of studies that are inconsistent with it.