jyinvisiblech
I understand that D is correct. However, could anyone explain why C is not correct? If the capuchin monkeys do not understand that Person A was refusing Person B's request, they can't identify that Person A is unhelpful. Thus there might be other reasons that capuchin monkeys avoid A.
url=[https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&un=GMATNinja]GMATNinja url=[https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&un=mikemcgarry]mikemcgarry url=[https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&un=KarishmaB]KarishmaB please help!
The question asks us to evaluate the support provided in the argument. This means that our task is to look at each option and ask, "if I knew whether this thing occurred, would that give me insight into the strength of the support in the argument?"
Starting with (D):
Quote:
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
It would be incredibly helpful to know whether this would happen. If the monkeys DID accept more food from Person B even
without the unhelpful interaction, it really blows a hole in the argument. Maybe the monkeys' decisions had nothing to do with Person A being unhelpful -- maybe they just didn't like that person for whatever reason.
Compare that to (C):
Quote:
C. the researchers considered that the capuchin monkeys might not have understood whether Person A was refusing Person B's request
Let's say that we find out that this DID happen -- the researchers DID consider that the monkeys might not understand the interaction. Well... what did the researchers conclude? Did the monkeys understand, or not? We would need this
additional information in order for the issue raised in (C) to actually be helpful. So, just knowing the info in (C) itself isn't enough to help us evaluate the strength of the support in the argument.
That's why (C) is out, and (D) is the correct answer.
I hope that helps!