Science writer: All scientists have beliefs and values that might

Hi,
Can anyone tell me as to Why E is wrong?

The information given in B is already stated in the passage.

Assumption Question: The answer must be true

Conclusion: Thus, any slanted interpretations of scientific data will generally have been removed before publication.

Question stem says :Reviewers are likely to notice and object to biases that they do not share.
The argument relies on the fact that the biases brought by the scientist who published the paper will be filtered by at least one of the scientists reviewing the paper. Now what if some bias which will slant the interpretation is shared among all the scientists?
In that case the author's argument will fail.
Hence this assumption is needed and must be true.

Please correct me if wrong!

coolnuts,
First, let's examine choice E:
The passage suggests that slanted interpretations can be removed through careful review by scientists who do not share the biases of the author or authors of the paper, but the passage does NOT suggest that this is the ONLY way to remove slanted interpretations. Whether there are other methods for removing slanted interpretations (eg review by an editor who is not a scientist) does not have any impact on the author's argument, so choice E can be eliminated.

The author states that the "reviewers are likely to notice and object to biases that they do not share"... but what if the biases of the reviewers are the same as those of the writer? Because the reviewers are only likely to notice and object to biases that they do not share, this suggests that they are not likely to notice and object to biases that they DO share. Any slanted interpretations shared by the reviewers will not be removed before publication, so choice B is the best answer.

can someone explain why it is B and not A?

Well, because only if the reviewer have shared biases will it attack the conclusion.


The author is saying that the reviewers will notice and object to biases they do not share, and concludes that slanted interpretations of data will be removed.
Now as per (A), consider a situation where the reviewers have certain biases. So what ? If these biases are not shared the reviewers will be able to identify the biases in the original data interpretations.


An Assumption when negated attacks the conclusion. Let's negate (A)

(A) The scientists reviewing serious scientific papers for publication do not always have biases likely to slant their interpretations of the data in those papers.

So what they have biases ? As long as the biases are not shared the goal of the review is achieved. This doesn't attack the conclusion.

Now let's negate (B)

(B) In general, biases that slant interpretations of data in serious scientific papers being reviewed for publication are not shared among all scientists.

Well if the biases are shared then what's point of reviewing? the reviewer will not be able to find flaws in data interpretation. This attacks the conclusion and is the right assumption.

Do you see how negating the assumption breaks the conclusion?
I hope this helps.

How is D incorrect ...although D & E are similar side

Can someone pls help understand why D is wrong?

Thanks!

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the science writer’s argument?

(A) The scientists reviewing serious scientific papers for publication do not always have biases likely to slant their interpretations of the data in those papers. - WRONG. What about when they have?

(B) In general, biases that slant interpretations of data in serious scientific papers being reviewed for publication are not shared among all scientists.

(C) Biases that are present in published scientific papers and shared by most scientists, including those who review the papers, are unlikely to impair the scientific value of those papers. - WRONG. Irrelevant at best. It is nowhere near of addressing the core of the argument.

(D) The interpretation of data is the only part of a serious scientific paper that is sometimes slanted by the beliefs and values of scientists. - WRONG. It is not about which part is slanted or which is not. It is the interpretation part that is likely to be affected and passage concludes that after review it is not.

(E) Slanted interpretations of data in a scientific paper can be removed only through careful review by scientists who do not share the biases of the author or authors of the paper. - WRONG. Like D this is also making an issue of a non-issue. It is not about in how many way/s slanted interpretations can be removed but whether those interpretations are removed.

The highlighted text is the key to passage - need to check the other side as well.

Answer B.