Q3 - When chimpanzees become angry at other

[smiller]

Question Type:
Explain a Result

Stimulus Breakdown:
We would expect a chimpanzee to attack after making a threat display, and to make threat displays before attacking. We're told instead that the two rarely occur together.

Answer Anticipation:
A correct answer choice might explain that these two things happen under very different circumstances. Perhaps a sassy chimpanzee will normally back down when another one makes a threat display, and when a chimpanzee actually attacks, it's sudden and unexpected: "We were all just sitting there, eating some termites, when WHAMMO! Fred just flipped out!"

Correct Answer:
(B)

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This is irrelevant. It tells us why chimps make threat gestures, but doesn't explain why they rarely attack afterward.

(B) This is the correct answer. If chimps can vent their aggression through threat gestures, and this prevents physical aggression, we know why the gestures are rarely followed by actual attacks. This establishes a causal relationship between the gestures and an absence of physical aggression, which indirectly addresses the other side of the paradox as well: if a chimp actually attacks, it's the result of not venting his aggression in some other way. See what happens when you keep that anger bottled up inside, Fred? You should have made a threat gesture.

(C) Like (A), this is irrelevant. Having other ways to vent aggression doesn't explain why threat gestures and attacks rarely coincide.

(D) Choice (D) is also irrelevant. If one chimp makes his own threat gestures in response to another's, it doesn't help explain why these chimps don't attack each other. In fact, it sounds like things would only be escalating in this scenario. Remember, we have to consider this choice on its own, separate from choice (B). Choice (D) doesn't tell us that the threat gestures help prevent physical aggression.

(E) Choice (E) is tempting, but doesn't actually resolve the paradox. It's tempting because it indicates that chimps who commonly make threat gestures are not the same ones who are likely to attack. But even if this is true, we're left with the same question: why is this so? Why do chimps like Fred suddenly attack without warning, while other chimps make threat gestures but rarely attack? Choice (E) adds a new dimension to the paradox, but unlike (B), it doesn't explain why the paradox occurs.

Takeaway/Pattern: Explain a Result questions often present two appealing answer choices. It's important to notice which choice most directly resolves the paradox, and which one leaves us with too many unanswered questions.

#officialexplanation

[judaydaday]

I understand why (B) is correct, but could someone tell me the process/reasoning for eliminating (e)? Thanks in advance!!

[rinagoldfield]

Thanks for your post!

On these Explain-A-Paradox questions, wrong answers will often explain one part of the contradiction in the stimulus. Choice (E) supports the idea that threat gestures are rarely followed by physical attacks. However, it does not help us understand why that is the case. Thus, (E) is sort of like a premise booster – it fits into the information given, but it doesn’t help explain it.
Choice (B) does help us understand why threat gestures are not followed by actual attacks.


Hope that helps.