Hello, everyone. This sort of fill-in-the-blank question type was more common in the past, but regardless of how a question is pitched to us, we still need to focus on just what the passage lays out. What does this one have in store?

• Sentence one tells us what the NIH is doing: funding research... to help scientists identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection.
• Sentence two zooms in, focusing on the researchers conducting the research—they are studying a phenomenon known as the "cocktail party effect."
• Sentence three provides information on certain psychiatric disorders that people may possess in which their ability to select what deserves attention and what does not is hampered.

Our goal is to determine what the NIH most likely believes in choosing to fund this line of research. As always, it is vital to keep both the question frame and the passage in mind when assessing the answer choices.


Remember, the researchers are interested in this phenomenon. It is possible that the NIH is not even aware of such a term. Besides, we cannot be expected to conclude that just because something has been researched (or even explained) before, the topic is unworthy of further study. This may be an easy answer to fall for if you have not practiced CR too much, but for the initiated, it should be apparent that there are too many logical gaps to fill.


There must be some reason that mice and owls were selected for the experiments, right? But would the NIH look at an experimental design and conclude that because mice and owls might possess the above abilities, the research was worth funding? It seems, again, as though the researchers selected these animals for some reason, and that the NIH is merely placing trust in the researchers. The word comparable is also suspect. It could be the case that one animal possesses better-than-human "cocktail party" abilities while the other may serve as nothing more than a control. We are not privy to information on the selection process. On first look, this answer choice can look promising. I might keep it in my first pass of the options. But the goal is always to choose the least debatable of the five answers presented, and I have my doubts about this one.


Now the focus is back on the NIH, just where it should be to answer the question at hand. The first line of the passage tells us outright that the NIH is funding research on mice and owls to help scientists identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection. If these circuits or pathways were not detectable, then we would have no compelling reason to believe the NIH would be willing to foot the bill for such research. This looks like a better option than (B) above.


Although the soft language in may be should not go unnoticed, a cure is definite, like the "off" of a light switch. The goal may be to find a cure, and the NIH may very well hope that such a cure will be found through this research avenue, but does the passage allow us to point to a given line to justify this statement as our answer? We should not have to furnish an explanation for what could be true; we want to get behind an option that follows from the information provided. Again, I would not call this a terrible answer. It just does not quite add up.


All we know is that the passage indicates that the NIH is funding a certain type of research. We cannot speculate on why it would or would not choose to fund other types. Probably the easiest of the five answer choices to eliminate, in my view.

I hope that helps clear any confusion on this one. Enjoy the competition, everyone.

- Andrew

The National Institutes of Health, or the NIH, is funding research on mice and owls to help scientists identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection. The researchers are studying what is known as the “cocktail party effect,” the ability of the brain, when exposed to multiple auditory stimuli, to select what deserves attention and what does not. People with certain psychiatric disorders, including ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia, are known to lack this neurological ability.

In allocating funds for the research outlined in the passage, the NIH most likely believes __________.

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect”
Maybe the effect has already been explained or not. It does not matter. Irrelevant. Incorrect.

(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli
The problem with this is when it says "comparable to those of humans". We don't know from the questions it they are comparable or not. Incorrect.

(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable
This is the correct one. They want to identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection, so they think that those circuits are detectable.

(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
We can not deduce this from the text. Incorrect.

(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical
Irrelevant.

IMO C

The purpose of the research on mice and owls is to determine the brain's ability to select what deserves attention and what does not in humans.

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect”
Irrelevant

(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli
Correct. The NIH fund the research because they believe the result will be useful for humans.

(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable
Irrelevant

(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
Irrelevant

(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical
It can be. But B is more precise. Incorrect


IMO, B

The National Institutes of Health, or the NIH, is funding research on mice and owls to help scientists identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection. The researchers are studying what is known as the “cocktail party effect,” the ability of the brain, when exposed to multiple auditory stimuli, to select what deserves attention and what does not. People with certain psychiatric disorders, including ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia, are known to lack this neurological ability.

In allocating funds for the research outlined in the passage, the NIH most likely believes __________.

This is an assumption question. The author wants to research about human brain regarding the ability of brain when exposed to multiple auditory stimuli. But he is using mice and owls for the research. Certainly there is a gap in reasoning.

The gap is that the mice and owl brains have abilities similar to that of human. This holds the conclusion true.

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect”
(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli - Correct
(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable
(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical

A: Even when previous research has partly explain the "cocktail party effect", the NIH can still fund for future researches to understand the effect further
B: This is the correct answer, because it helps explain why mice and owls are chosen for the research
C: While this could be true, it does not help explain why mice and owls are chosen for the research
D: The NIH funds for the research merely to "help scientists identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection"
E: If so, the research might just pick any animal => does not help explain why mice and owls are chosen for the research

Stimulus: research on mice and owls --> identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection of humans
the NIH most likely believes __________.


(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect” => Out of scope, not mentioned in the stimulus
(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli => reasonable
(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable => irrelevant to the reason of the research & the fund
(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research => Out of scope
(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical => Out of scope.

IMO: B is the answer

Reasoning map:

NIH -> funding research on stuff used in attention and selection -> studying cocktail party effect (CPE)
CPE says:
when brain exposed to many auditory stimuli -> selection of what deserves attention is impacted, people with ADHD, autism, schiz are lacking ability

Question:
In funding this, NIH likely believes ____

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect” - not necessarily, perhaps previous research explained it but not in full. Too extreme. Eliminate.
(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli - first of all this is absurd to think, which is no reason to eliminate an answer but should raise a red flag. The study does not necessarily need comparable abilities among subjects to be worth it. Just a comparable structure (ie brain with neurological pathways). Eliminate.
(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable - IMO the best answer. I don't love the negating technique (maybe because I am never sure what to negate), but here if the auditory attention and selection pathways were not detectable, this study would be a complete waste of time.
(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research - I don't see anything in here that implies are cure is the objective of the research. It seems to me like the purpose is gathering information first before looking for a cure. IMO eliminate.
(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical - not necessarily. Perhaps it is cheaper and easier to start with owls and mice. Eliminate.

A-Passage does not any bearing with previous research.
C-no necessarily true; they are funding research to see that.
D-there is possibility, but not necessarily true.
E-No mention of it.

B is true, because "the neural circuits involved in attention and selection in owls and mice can be used to study the “cocktail party effect". . People with certain psychiatric disorders are known to lack this. How will they know link between owl and mice, and human are not known.

Hence B ans

(C) is the answer IMO


(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect”

We can't assume that the purpose could be to validate the results of a theory already done etc - Eliminate

(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli

There is not explicit evidence/fact in the passage that the research result will be used to identify auditory stimuli for humans- Option is tempting but not an assumption -Eliminate

(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable
Yes, That's is the start of the research if neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are not detectable than there can not be any such research - Correct choice

(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
No that's not a necessary requirement based on the facts presented in the passage; We only know People with certain psychiatric disorders, including ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia, are known to lack this neurological ability- Eliminate

(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical
That is never discussed in the passage, and not an assumption- Eliminate

NIH funding -> to find neural circuits involved in audio and selection -> study mice using cocktail party effect experiment.



cocktail party effect need not be explained. the goal is different - find neural circuits. Eliminate.

Tempting. but NIH is interested in neural circuits, even if neurological abilities are similar - it would not help find/detect the circuits themselves. Eliminate.

Hits on the nail -> yes, we want to find the pathways - and a basic question is - are they detectable. NIH knows they are, hence the experiment is funded, if not, then the experiment is baseless. Keep.

Cure is not they want to find, so that is not the base of conducting this experiment. Eliminate.

Maybe, but is that why they have funded the experiment with a specific goal on mice. Think of all the experiments that we conduct. Hell, think about how covid vaccines were developed. Eliminate.

Ans. C
_________________

In allocating funds for the research outlined in the passage, the NIH most likely believes __________.

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect” -- incorrect, as this need not be a belief to fund the research. This could be sufficient though
(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli --- Correct
(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable -- Incorrect, The stimulus mentions about identification as well.
(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research -- Incorrect, this is a stretch
(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical -- Incorrect, this cannot be an assumption to do the research, as the conclusion is about the research funding on mice.

IMO : B

The National Institutes of Health, or the NIH, is funding research on mice and owls to help scientists identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection. The researchers are studying what is known as the “cocktail party effect,” the ability of the brain, when exposed to multiple auditory stimuli, to select what deserves attention and what does not. People with certain psychiatric disorders, including ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia, are known to lack this neurological ability.

In allocating funds for the research outlined in the passage, the NIH most likely believes __________.

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect”
No. Maybe there is previous research that has explained this effect.

(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli
Research is being done to identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection - not assess the neurological abilities of mice and owls

(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable
Correct. If they don't believe that these are detectable, then what is the point of research?

(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
No. Maybe a cure could be found but maybe not as well!

(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical
No. Out of scope. Ethical/unethical reasons are not mentioned

My answer is (B). Our goal is to find the most logical sentence to complete the discussion.

(A) No strong support for this option. The definition of "explain" is very vague. The definition for “cocktail party effect” is already provided.

(B) The last sentence of the paragraph strongly suggests it. We assume that the paragraph is coherent, so we need to draw such inference.

(C) This cannot be the main reason in allocating research funds.

(D) Maybe, but its bar is too high.

(E) We cannot come to such belief.
Maybe similar research conducted on humans is too complicated to be practical.
Maybe similar research is also funded.

In allocating funds for the research outlined in the passage, the NIH most likely believes __________.

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect”
not talked about pevious research- we dont know
(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli
why would you choose such animals. the reason is because it may possess some common abilities with humans. make sense
(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable
maybe expereinced , felt or any reaction to body.
detection may not be only way .
it doesnt explain why we need to choose owls then?
(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
it may not be necessary , the scientists are more interested to know about expereiments on neural circuits
How nueral circuists can help in heal on physical damage-AIDs etc..
(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical
not necessary; it maybe possible in next phases the experiements would be conducted on humans too

Final answer: B

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect”
The argument is not concluded for the explanation of the cocktail party effect, rather NIH was trying to find out the reason behind such an act. So, although, this option is very tempting, would be the wrong choice.
(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli
This is in line with our pre-thinking. So, it's correct.
Correct.
(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable
Not directly linked with this argument. So wrong.
(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
It is not the main motto of this research. So irrelevant & wrong.
(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical
Out of scope.

C ?


(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect”
Nothing spoken about previous research

(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli
Even if the neurological abilities are not COMPARABLE to those of humans, still research could be funded. As stated, the goal of research is to find the neuro circuits in mice & owls. Those circuits need not be "same" as humans'. What if the circuits are not comparable, but help scientists learn more about neurological pathway in general?

(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable
This is the primary assumption. If the NIH knows that these pathways are not detectable, there is no reason to fund this research.

(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
What if goal of research is not to find cure but general scientific curiosity ? Cannot be assumed.

(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical
Again cannot be assumed. What if they dont want to conduct research on humans because it is in earlier stages and they require animal testing prior to researching on humans next?

The National Institutes of Health, or the NIH, is funding research on mice and owls to help scientists identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection. The researchers are studying what is known as the “cocktail party effect,” the ability of the brain, when exposed to multiple auditory stimuli, to select what deserves attention and what does not. People with certain psychiatric disorders, including ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia, are known to lack this neurological ability.

In allocating funds for the research outlined in the passage, the NIH most likely believes __________.

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect” : No this cannot be the belief, even if someone explained "cocktail party effect" that does not matter. The funding will be provided only if this study yields something beneficial for humans . Eliminate A


(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli. This is tricky as even if the mice and owls neurological abilities are not comparable to those of humans . But the results can be used to benefit humans, the funding can still be provided. Eliminate B

(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable. Whether the "neurological pathways" can be detected is not the concern for NIA. If this benefits the humans then they will be happy. Eliminate C

(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research. Yes, if they believe that there is a possibility of a cure for the humans . Then they will provide funding. So D is correct. IMO

(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical. Again that is not the consideration when giving the funding. If such studies, even if they are ethical , are not able to produce results . There is not need to fund those studies. Moreover, conducting some research that is unethical for humans does not necessarily mean that funding for that research should be provided for conducting research on some other species. Eliminate E

My answer is B).

This one feels like an assumption question, so will treat it as such, even though this format of the prompt is a bit unusual.

Background info: what is the "cocktail party effect"
Premise: people with certain psychiatric disorders lack this ability
Conclusion / action: NIH is allocating funding on mice / owls research to identify the neural circuits involved

The missing link or gap seems to be between human ailments and the research animals (mice / owls).

A) - notice that the aim of the study is to identify the neural circuits involved in the process, so whether previous research has explained the "cocktail party effect" is irrelevant.

B) - yes, this one closes the gap we identified above.

C) - we are doing research to identify the pathways. Whether we will be successful in the venture is not the required assumption.

D) - all we know is that the aim is to identify the circuits involved. Whether there will be practical implications is beyond the scope of the passage.

E) - we don't know why similar research is not conducted on human - maybe we can, maybe we can't for reasons other than ethicality.

So B).

We need to pay special attention to the following sentence to get to the correct answer.
"The National Institutes of Health, or the NIH, is funding research on mice and owls to help scientists identify the neural circuits involved in attention and selection."
So, NIH is funding research to help scientists identify neural circuits involved in attention and selection. Now, If NIH were to not believe that these circuits were identifiable, would they have funded the research? obviously no. They are funding it only because they believe that these circuits can be identified.

(A) that previous research has not already explained the “cocktail party effect” ( Incorrect. No information about previous research given so we cant conclude whether NIH belives in this statement)

(B) that mice and owls possess neurological abilities comparable to those of humans to select an auditory stimulus from among many such stimuli (Incorrect: Pretty close and can be the reason as well for the research but no direct proof is given. This needs a strong assumption to be true)

(C) that the neurological pathways involved in auditory attention and selection are detectable (Correct: As discussed at the start of explanation, this statement exactly matches our rethinking. In fact this is rephrased of what is given in the passage)

(D) that a cure for psychiatric disorders such as ADHD, autism, and schizophrenia may be found through such research
(Incorrect. We have no proof of such belief)

(E) that similar research conducted on humans would be unethical (Incorrect. Again no proof of such belief)
_________________