Can you please explain if my logic in choosing B is correct
Premise : in 1960’s studies of rats crowding caused increase in attacks in rats
Premise 2: recent experiments recent experiments attacks did
not become any more frequent
implies : the attacks or behaviors in rats = attacks in R Monkeys
implies all monkeys attacks behaviors = attacks in behaviors in R monkeys
Concl: , for any species of monkey crowding increases aggression SAME for rats
Implies rats = monkeys
Prove: R monkeys not= monkeys then done
Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other
monkeys do. – C
is my understanding correct I feel the vvay im thinking on this is not the correct vvay to approach a problem like this
can yu please explain 1) vvhat am I missing
2) right approach
In 1960’s studies of rats, scientists found that crowding increases the number of attacks
among the animals significantly. But in recent experiments in which rhesus monkeys were
placed in crowded conditions, although there was an increase in instances of “coping”
behavior—such as submissive gestures and avoidance of dominant individuals—attacks did
not become any more frequent. Therefore it is not likely that, for any species of monkey,
crowding increases aggression as significantly as was seen in rats. Which of the
following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. All the observed forms of coping behavior can be found among rhesus monkeys living in
B. In the studies of rats, nondominant individuals were found to increasingly avoid dominant
individuals when the animals were in crowded conditions.
C. Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other
D. Some individual monkeys in the experiment were involved in significantly more attacks than
the other monkeys were.
E. Some of the coping behavior displayed by rhesus monkeys is similar to behavior rhesus
monkeys use to bring to an end an attack that has begun.