An anthropologist studying the social function of human skin has state

Let's start by identifying the researcher's hypothesis: "tattooing has surged in popularity in Western cultures over the last 10-15 years because of a desire to express individuality despite an increase in the mass production of other forms of personal decoration, such as clothing and jewelry." This hypothesis implies that people in Western cultures have found expressing their individuality with those other forms of personal decoration to be less effective as mass production of those decorations has increased.

Since, according to the author, tattoos function as a mode of self-identification and can be used to communicate ideas of central importance to those who bear them, we can infer that tattoos can also be used to express individuality. If an increase in the mass production of those other decorations, such as clothing and jewelry, has decreased people's ability to express their individuality with those items, perhaps those people have sought other means of expressing their individuality (i.e. using tattoos).

Now that we understand the author's argument, which of the following would be most useful to determine in evaluating the researcher’s hypothesis?


At first glance, this option is tempting. If clothing and jewelry become less effective means of expressing individuality the more they are mass-produced, maybe the same is true of tattoos? However, just because the most popular tattoo designs are mass produced does not mean that most tattoo designs are mass produced or that mass production of tattoo designs has increased or decreased over the last 10-15 years. Also, if the placement (and not just the design) of tattooed images affects the ideas communicated by those tattoos, then people can still use mass produced tattoo designs to express their individuality. Thus, choice (A) does not help us evaluate the author's hypothesis.


The author's argument assumes that the mass production of decorations such as clothing and jewelry has made it more difficult for people to express their individuality with those items. But if those people still feel that they can express their individuality with mass produced decorations or if those people largely do not care to express their individuality, then they would have no reason to use tattoos. We can eliminate those possibilities if we know that there has been an increase in the past 10-15 years in the number of people who wish to express individuality in their physical appearance, but feel that they cannot do so by other means. Choice (B) does help us evaluate the author's hypothesis.


It doesn't matter whether people of ancient civilizations used tattoos to express individuality. We only care whether people in Western cultures over the last 10-15 years have used tattoos to express individuality. Thus, choice (C) can be eliminated.


(D) is tempting, but it isn't nearly as strong as (B). First, remember that we're looking for the answer that would be the MOST useful in evaluating the researcher's hypothesis that "tattooing has surged in popularity in Western cultures over the last 10-15 years because of a desire to express individuality..." But (D) does nothing to help explain why there has been a surge in popularity; (D) gives us no indication that anything related to tattooing has changed over time. (B), on the other hand, directly addresses how the desire to express individuality might have led to the the surge in popularity over the last 10-15 years. (D) isn't nearly as useful as (B), and can be eliminated.


Determining this information does NOT tell us whether the increase in mass production of clothing and jewelry has made it more difficult for people to express their individuality with those items nor does it tell us whether people in Western cultures have increasingly used tattoos to express their individuality over the last 10-15 years. This information does not help us evaluate the author's argument, so choice (E) can be eliminated.

Choice (B) is the best answer.