HASTOWINGMAT wrote:
I believe for 5th question, option B is the correct the correct answer as it creates a bias.
Please can elaborate more here why B here is rejected and A is accepted.
Hi
Let me try to address your query. Question 5 asks us: ...if the researchers had
NOT found that two extinct carnivore species were free of tooth breakage, the researchers would have concluded that:
Let us examine the relevant section of the passage that deals with this point. The second sentence of the second paragraph mentions this fact, and states:
They rejected preservational bias because a total absence of breakage in two extinct species demonstrated that the fractures were not the result of abrasion within the pits.Hence, the absence of breakage in these two species helped the researchers to reject "preservational bias". Therefore, "...if the researchers had
NOT found" this, they would have had to allow for "preservational bias".
What exactly preservational bias is is explained in the second half of the same sentence, which states: "...the fractures
were not the result of abrasion within the pits."
Since this explains the rejection of preservational bias, preservational bias itself would be the complement of this ie; "...the fractures
were the result of abrasion within the pits."
This fact is well laid out in option (A), which is the correct answer. Option (B) does not deal with breakage within the pits and is incorrect.
Hope this helps.
_________________
Crackverbal Prep Team
www.crackverbal.com