Understanding the argument -
A bedrock assumption in theories that explain and predict human behaviour is people's motivation to pursue pleasure and avoid pain. - Fact
However, this belief cannot be reconciled with the decision to engage in experiences known to elicit negative feelings, such as horror movies. - Conclusion.
Investigators generally use one of two theories to explain why people like horror movies. - Premise
The first is that the person is not actually afraid, but excited by the movie. The second explanation is that they are willing to endure the terror in order to enjoy a euphoric sense of relief at the end. - Premise
Option Elimination - Flaw
A. Presumes that when people are embedded in a protective frame of mind, such as when watching horror movies, they actually do not feel anything other than excitement or relief. - The scope of our argument is limited to excitement or relief. Other feelings are out of scope.
B. Labours under the assumption that people are incapable of experiencing positive and negative emotions at the same time. - Yes. The investigators assume that people experience one feeling at a time. Either excitement only (positive) or enduring terror (negative) and then relief (positive). What if they experience complex emotions, such as positive and negative, at the same time? What if they are watching a suspenseful scene that gives them enjoyment/positive feelings while they also experience terror/negative feelings? Yes, that's the flaw.
C. Ignores the possibility that people watching horror movies might actually be happy rather than scared. - "Happiness can encompass a sense of overall well-being, contentment, and fulfillment beyond the momentary excitement of a specific activity." While the investigator talks about excitement, which can be a result of a thrilling experience leading to a rise in adrenaline, happiness is a broader concept that is not discussed in either of the explanations given by the investigators. So, this qualifies as a third explanation, which is not the scope of what we are trying to do here. Our scope is limited to finding the flaw in the investigator's reasoning (2 reasons they have given) and not coming up with a third reason. Moreover, this still talks about one emotion at a time. Out of scope.
D. Ignores the possibility that negative feelings can also evoke positive affects when that feeling ends. - No, it doesn't ignore. This is what the second explanation explained. Distortion.
E. Incorrectly argues that horror movie viewers are happy to be unhappy. - "Happy to be unhappy" means they experience two emotions at the same time. And this option says that the investigators incorrectly argue that they can't have 2 feelings at the same time. But this is exactly what the investigators did not argue. So if they even did not argue something, then how can they be correct or incorrect about it? Opposite of what is stated in the passage.