Q2 - Jocko, a chimpanzee, was once given a large bunch of ba

[Laura Damone]

What does the Question Stem tell us?
"most seriously calls into question" = Weaken Question

Break down the Stimulus:
A chimp gets a bunch of bananas and screams about it, and the other chimps come and take it. Next time, he gets just 1 banana and he keeps quiet. From this, the zookeeper concludes that the chimp learned from the first experience and changed his behavior the second time around. Thus, the zookeeper is making a causal argument, saying that learning from experience was the cause of the changed behavior. Because this is a Weaken question, our first move is to think "could it have been something else?"

Any prephrase?
Could it have been something else? Did anything else change? Sure. 1 banana vs a whole bunch (literally).

Correct answer:
B

Answer choice analysis:
A) Playing favorites isn't relevant here. Out of scope.

B) Correct! This addresses our prephrased alternate cause.

C) The takers are irrelevant here. The argument's conclusion is only about the chimp with the bananas.

D) Unless we assume our buddy was food-barking to alert the other chimps to the fact that he had plenty of bananas to go around, the fact that they alert others even when alone isn't relevant.

E) The universal appeal of the banana has no impact on this argument

Takeaway/Pattern: When you see causality in a Weaken question, your first though should be: "could it be something else?" Alternate Cause is one of the most common types of weakeners.

#officialexplanation

[karen_chu22]

Would you please help me with this question? I don't understand why the answer is B.

Jocko, a chimpanzee, was once given a large bunch of bananas by a zookeeper after the more dominant members of the chimpanzee's troop had wandered off. In his excitement, Jocko uttered some loud "food barks." The other chimpanzees returned and took the bananas away. The next day, Jocko was once again found alone and was given a single banana. This time, however, he kept silent. The zookeeper concluded that Jocko's silence was a stratagem to keep the other chimpanzees from his food.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously calls into the question the zookeeper's conclusion?

A. Chimpanzees utter food barks only when their favorite foods are available.

B. Chimpanzees utter food barks only when they encounter a sizable quantity of food.

C. Chimpanzees frequently take food from other chimpanzees merely to assert dominance.

D. Even when they are alone, chimpanzees often make noises that appear to be signals to other chimpanzees.

E. Bananas are a food for which all of the chimpanzees at the zoo show a decided preference.


Thanks!

[sumukh09]

B) is the correct answer because if Chimps only utter food barks when they encounter a sizable quantity of food then that gives an alternative explanation to why the Chimp remained silent this time. Moreover, it's not because the Chimp learned his lesson that if he barks then he'll get his bananas stolen, but rather because the only time they ever utter food barks is when there's a large quantity of bananas; so it wasn't a "strategem" to keep the other Chimps from his food -- they just don't bark if there's only one banana.

[MeenaV936]

Hi -- why wasn't the answer D? I don't understand because D shows that the silence wasn't a stratagem and establishes there is no pattern in the noises, that chimpanzees often make noises when they are alone.

[ohthatpatrick]

I think you're making some aggressive leaps there.

The fact that chimps often make noises, though alone, that appear to be signals to other chimps doesn't let us suddenly say "there is no pattern in the noises".

The chimps who make sounds when they are alone might not THINK they're alone.

In the example we heard about, Jocko was alone when he barked. The troop had wandered off, but maybe Jocko assumed they were still in earshot.

This could be happening other times, when the troop ISN'T in earshot. That wouldn't necessarily mean there is no pattern in the noises; it could just mean that the chimps making noises are assuming there are other chimps around who can hear them.

Another problem with where we'd be taking (D) is that even if seemed to show that barking was sometimes random (done even though there aren't others around), it wouldn't necessarily show that silence is random. Maybe chimps are only silent about food when they're trying to hoard it.

I think your overall sense is correct that (D) kinda weakens, since it muddies the water about how much we should interpret from barking (so maybe it muddies the water in terms of how much we can interpret from silence).

But like any Strengthen / Weaken question, if we have more than one answer that goes in the right direction, then the tiebreaker is "Which answer has stronger language / more impact?"

(B) is "only when", which is conditional / universal / certain.
(D) is "often", which is wishy-washy, not necessarily even 50% of the time.

(B) doesn't leave any mystery. According to this rule,
"If they haven't encountered a sizable quantity of food, they won't utter a food bark."

Since the Day 2 scenario did not involve a sizable quantity (just a single banana), we wouldn't infer anything from the lack of barking other than this typical behavior that they only bark when there's lots of food. (presumably, if there's lots of food, they bark so that they can share it, whereas when there's only a little food, there's no point warning others and making them jealous).

Our author thinks that Day 2 was a deviation from Day 1 behavior, that Jocko learned his lesson and had modified his approach according to what happened on Day 1.

This answer firmly establishes that Jocko's approach was consistent from Day 1 to Day 2.

Hope this helps.