Q10 - Various studies have concluded that song overlapping

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Inference (Passage Completion)

Stimulus Breakdown:
Studies say that when one bird starts singing on top of another's song, it's a sign of aggression. These studies are based on how other birds respond to this behavior, but any response can be interpreted as a reaction to perceived aggression.

Answer Anticipation:
The correct answer is supposed to pull together the various strands of the conversation into a safely worded conclusion. The author has set up some grounds for skepticism as to the study's conclusion.

The study concluded "behavior X is a sign of aggression" based on how others responded to behavior X, but the author is saying "any response can be interpreted as a response to aggression".

What would a safely worded version of this skepticism sound like ... maybe something like, "Thus, it's inconclusive whether song overlapping is a sign of aggression" ... or "this study does not provide strong evidence for the idea that song overlapping is a sign of aggression"?

Correct Answer:
E

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This conclusion would come out of nowhere. The author's focus is the studies, not the birds. And at no point were we talking about whether responses to aggression are predictable / unpredictable.

(B) TOO STRONG: "can provide NO insight"?

(C) TOO STRONG: "it's likely NOT a signal of aggression?" This would be committing the Unproven vs. Untrue flaw. The author is definitely trying to say that these studies don't constitute proof that song overlapping is aggressive. But that doesn't allow us to conclude the opposite (even if we hedge it with 'likely')

(D) TOO STRONG: "song overlapping has NO function"?

(E) YES, close to what we predicted. This safely ties together the three ideas presented.

Takeaway/Pattern: Fill in the blank Inference is all about deriving a safe synthesis. The two big patterns are paragraphs like this, in which two statements are put into tension with each and the conclusion finds a safe way to resolve them, or in which the paragraph lays out an analogy and our task with filling in the conclusion is to complete the analogy.

#officialexplanation

[JoeyY14]

I’m wondering why C is too strong here. I felt E is kinda stronger than C (C even looks like one of those conclusions of typical flaw questions) Any thoughts?