In an experiment, capuchin monkeys watched Person A refuse Person B's

In an experiment, capuchin monkeys watched Person A refuse Person B's request to help open a jar of food. Afterward, each monkey could select which of the two people to accept food from. The monkeys accepted food less often from the unhelpful person, Person A, than from Person B. The researchers concluded that capuchin monkeys generally prefer to avoid unhelpful individuals.

Q1. Did the Capucin monkeys interpret A not helping B correctly ?
Q2. Do the Capucin monkeys actually prefer helpful disposition ?
Either an Yes (would strengthen) or No (would weaken) answer provided by the Options to either of the above Questions will help us evaluate this Premise.

In order to evaluate the support provided for the researchers' conclusion, it would be most helpful to know whether

A. capuchin monkeys, in a second, similar experiment, conducted for comparison, watched Person A being helpful to Person B
Let's say the monkeys did watch A being helpful to B, but is this is not enough to provide an Yes or NO answer to the Q1 (see above). If the experiment also included the monkeys taking more food from either A or B, Only then we could have come to the conclusion.
But they were only watching A being helpful to B, We don't know if they received more food from A / B, it's not provided in the option. Hence it doesn't answer our question.

B. capuchin monkeys with more-helpful dispositions are more likely than those with less-helpful dispositions to offer food to and accept food from other capuchin monkeys
Again it doesn't answer Q1 or Q2 since the interpretation is about receiving food from Monkeys ( whose actual disposition whether helpful or not isn't clear )

C. the researchers considered that the capuchin monkeys might not have understood whether Person A was refusing Person B's request
The researchers considering whether the monkeys understood the interpretation correctly or incorrectly, does not necessarily prove the fact that the Monkeys themselves interpreted it correctly ! Only through experiment or evidence we can correlate that only through simple consideration !
(maybe (Yes) the researches considered it but their consideration may be proven wrong later or maybe (No) they did not consider this and yet this interpretation would be proven true later on) Yes / NO answer to this doesn't give conclusive answers to the Q1

D. capuchin monkeys would accept food more often from Person B than from Person A in a similar experiment in which Person A and Person B did not interact
This one definitely gives an evidence to provide an answer to our Q1. This should be the proper answer.
S1: If answer to this option is an YES it means Capucin monkeys simply like B better nothing to do with helpful disposition Q1. No ( Monkeys don't interpret it, they don't understand who is helpful or not ).
S2: If the answer to this option No that means Q1 doesn't have a definite / conclusive answer.
But S1 is enough to weaken the scientist's conclusion.

E. monkeys of some other species resemble capuchin monkeys in their responses to unhelpful individuals in similar experimental conditions
This again won't give an definite Yes or No ans to either Q1 or Q2 as it simply isn't about Capucin monkeys.


Request an Expert answer for this Question.
mikemcgarry