The passage says:* Goose bumps were useful in animals with thick hair or feathers (insulation or defense).
* In humans, hair is too thin for that use.
* But goose bumps may now serve a “new role”: showing emotions like fear, rage, or pleasure.
* This makes them a **signal to others** (like flushing does).
So the author is basically saying: *Even though goose bumps are useless for insulation/defense, they might now be useful as a social signal.*
For that reasoning to hold, the author is assuming that **other people can perceive goose bumps and that such perception is beneficial somehow**. Otherwise, they couldn’t serve as a signal.
Now check the answer choices:
**A.** Emotional responses in humans can be triggered by thermoregulatory mechanisms.
* Not required. The argument is about goose bumps being *visible* signals, not about triggers.
**B.** The perceptibility of emotional responses to other humans offers some kind of benefit.
* Yes! This is the assumption. If signaling emotions had no benefit, goose bumps wouldn’t have acquired a new role.
**C.** If human hair were more substantial, goose bumps would not have acquired a new role.
* Interesting but irrelevant. Doesn’t matter for the argument.
**D.** Goose bumps in animals with feathers, fur, or quills may also be linked to emotional responses.
* Not needed. Passage is about humans.
**E.** In humans, goose bumps represent an older physiological response than flushing.
* Not discussed, irrelevant.
Correct Answer: **B**Because the assumption is that showing emotional responses through goose bumps has *some advantage*, otherwise they wouldn’t have a meaningful “new role.”