Scientist: In an experiment, dogs had access to a handle they could pull to release food into a nearby enclosure that contained a familiar dog and nothing else, contained an unfamiliar dog and nothing else, or was empty. The dogs typically released more food to the familiar dog than to the unfamiliar dog. This suggests that dogs are more motivated to help other dogs they know than to help unfamiliar dogs.

Core- dogs are more motivated to help other dogs they know than to help unfamiliar dogs
Type-strengthen

The scientist's argument would be most strengthened if it were true that, in the experiment, the dogs with access to the handle tended to release more food when

A. the behavior was being encouraged by a familiar person than when it was being encouraged by an unfamiliar person- irrelevant- who encouraged the behavior is not relevant

B. the enclosure was empty than when it contained an unfamiliar dog - incorrect, this compares empty enclosure vs unfamiliar dog and thus it does not help us

C. an unfamiliar dog in the enclosure was displaying hostility toward them than when an unfamiliar dog in the enclosure appeared friendly- incorrect, we do not know the effect of hostile and friendly behavior on the behavior of the dog with access to handle

D. a dog in the enclosure appeared uninterested in food already released into the enclosure than when it appeared interested in that food- incorrect, we do not know whether this dog is a familiar one or unfamiliar

E. a familiar dog was in the enclosure than when a familiar dog was visible but the enclosure was empty- Correct, both the scenarios involve a familiar dog.
Situation 1- a familiar dog was in enclosure
Situation 2- a familiar dog was visible but the enclosure was empty --> the release of food into the empty enclosure would not help the visible dog and thus the dog with handle will release lesser amount of food.

Answer E
_________________

ArtVandaley


I know you requested expert help, but I'll give it a shot.

Scientist: In an experiment, dogs had access to a handle they could pull to release food into a nearby enclosure that contained a familiar dog and nothing else, contained an unfamiliar dog and nothing else, or was empty. The dogs typically released more food to the familiar dog than to the unfamiliar dog. This suggests that dogs are more motivated to help other dogs they know than to help unfamiliar dogs.

The scientist's argument would be most strengthened if it were true that, in the experiment, the dogs with access to the handle tended to release more food when

A. the behavior was being encouraged by a familiar person than when it was being encouraged by an unfamiliar person

B. the enclosure was empty than when it contained an unfamiliar dog

C. an unfamiliar dog in the enclosure was displaying hostility toward them than when an unfamiliar dog in the enclosure appeared friendly

D. a dog in the enclosure appeared uninterested in food already released into the enclosure than when it appeared interested in that food

E. a familiar dog was in the enclosure than when a familiar dog was visible but the enclosure was empty


In this experiment, the scientist came to the conclusion that the reason a dog provided more food to an familiar dog in an enclosure than to an unfamiliar dog in a separate enclosure is that the "participant" dog prefers to help a familiar dog than an unfamiliar dog. More specifically, if a familiar or unfamiliar dog is in an enclosure, it means that it may require help.

Choice E states that the enclosure (e.g. dog requiring help) may have nothing to do with it... the dog may be, in fact, just more likely to provide more food, or press the handle more, when this dog merely sees a familiar dog, whether that familiar dog is in an enclosure or not. Well, this would then mean that the dog doesn't necessarily care about helping. It just puts more food into an enclosure when it sees a familiar dog that is in that enclosure or anywhere visible (not necessarily in that enclosure). It may also be the case that when the dog sees an unfamiliar dog that is in the enclosure or anywhere around it, it will not press the handle as much (for some reason that we have not identified..

The key here is whether dog cares about helping or not. We can weaken the scientist's interpretation of the results if we can show that the dog may not care about helping.

Official Explantion

Argument Evaluation

Which one of the five experimental outcomes, if added to the information given, would most strengthen the evidence for the scientist's conclusion?

There were three enclosures, two of which contained a dog. Only one of these contained a familiar dog. The dogs released more food to familiar dogs than to unfamiliar dogs. The scientists thereby concluded that dogs are more motivated to help familiar dogs than they are to help unfamiliar dogs.

However, it is possible that releasing the food to the familiar dog could have been motivated by other reasons. For example, the dog could simply be trying to communicate with the familiar dog rather than necessarily trying specifically to help this dog.

If the dogs released more food to a familiar dog while it was contained in an enclosure than when it was not enclosed yet nearby and visible, this would strengthen the idea of trying to “help” the other dog.

A. This information would weaken the scientist's argument. It introduces information suggesting the presence of a confounding variable in the experimental setup. That is, if the behavior was encouraged by a familiar person, we would not be able to tell whether it was this person's presence or the presence of the other dog that increased the behavior.

B. This would suggest that the dog's activation of the lever was not contingent on providing food to another animal. In other words, if the dog provides food even when there is no animal to provide food for, then it follows that the presence of the other dog is irrelevant to this behavior.

C. The experimental setup described here introduces the factor of friendliness. Adding this extra factor could easily confound testing of the original hypothesis, which suggested that simple familiarity increased the behavior.

D. The experimental setup described here introduces a factor of food interest. Adding this extra factor could easily confound testing of the original hypothesis, which suggested that simple familiarity increased the behavior.

E. Correct. This information would strengthen the hypothesis that a desire to help a familiar dog was operative in the dog's behavior.

The correct answer is E.