Babblers, a bird species, live in large cooperative groups. Each

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) Half scope. This would explain why it's not a big deal that the predators are alerted, but it doesn't explain why the babblers take the risk of making the noise in the first place!

(B) I'd definitely leave this on the first pass - it gives a benefit to starting the call. After analyzing the rest of the answers, this would be my selection, as it gives a reason to make the noise. While the babblers would generally be fine, they can scare off the predator by making noise, thus increasing the likelihood they all survive.

(C) Out of scope. The stimulus talks about the predators as a group, so it doesn't matter how many different types there are.

(D) Interesting! I might leave this on the first pass. This answer choice is trying to get you to think that the predators can't hear the birds, and they have a much better chance of seeing them, so barking isn't a risk. However, the answer states "relatively" weak hearing - that in no way guarantees they wouldn't be able to hear "loud barklike call[s]".

(E) Magnanimous babblers! This answer gives the other animals reason to hope the babblers make a their noise, but it doesn't give the babblers themselves a reason to do so. Therefore, it doesn't resolve the paradox.

Takeaway/Pattern: Some Explain questions will have a clear direction they're taking with the answer, but others will be more open. To me, this one is much more open - I'm looking for a benefit to making noise that outweighs the risk, and I get it in (B).