In 1960s studies of rats, scientists found that crowding increases

Question

In 1960s studies of rats, scientists found that crowding increases the number of attacks among the animals significantly. But in recent experiments in which rhesus monkeys were placed in crowded conditions, although there was an increase in instances of “coping” behavior—such as submissive gestures and avoidance of dominant individuals—attacks did not become any more frequent. Therefore it is not likely that, for any species of monkey, crowding increases aggression as significantly as was seen in rats.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) All the observed forms of coping behavior can be found among rhesus monkeys living in uncrowded conditions.

(B) In the studies of rats, nondominant individuals were found to increasingly avoid dominant individuals when the animals were in crowded conditions.

(C) Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other monkeys do.

(D) Some individual monkeys in the experiment were involved in significantly more attacks than the other monkeys were.

(E) Some of the coping behavior displayed by rhesus monkeys is similar to behavior rhesus monkeys use to bring to an end an attack that has begun.

mikemcgarry · Accepted Answer

First, I will say I find it a little unusual that no one seems to be able to identify the source of this question. Hmmm. Because you ask about (C) , I will simply address this. The argument is very tricky. First, it gives us evidence about rats. Then it gives us seemingly contradictory evidence about rhesus monkeys. Finally, it draws a conclusion, not about rhesus monkeys, but about all monkeys . Clearly, there's some important unstated link between what we know about rhesus monkeys specifically, and what we can conclude about all monkeys. Always look for these unstated links --- what apparent leap does the argument make between the evidence and the conclusion? This is an assumption of the argument, and it's absolutely core to the argument. See this blog: https://magoosh.com/gmat/2012/arguments- ... -the-gmat/ Obviously, in a "find the assumption question", this is relevant. One of the best ways to strengthen an argument is to verify its assumption, and one of the best ways to attack an argument is to undercut its assumption. Right there, you have the three most common GMAT CR questions, and a single skill, finding the assumption, can help with all three. Again, here the assumption has something to do with a link between how aggressive rhesus monkeys are and how aggressive other kinds of monkeys would be. Choice (C) goes to the heart of this --- essentially, it says rhesus monkeys are way more aggressive than other kinds of monkeys. Therefore, if the overcrowding is not enough to provoke the pugnacious rhesus monkeys to aggression, then it would not be enough to provoke any of the less aggressive monkeys either. Choice (C) affirms the assumption of the argument, so it is an ideal strengthener, and the best answer among these five. Does this make sense? Mike :-)

BKimball · Answer

What we have here is a "strengthen the conclusion" question. To strengthen a conclusion, you need to make one of the argument's underlying assumptions into a supporting premise by stating it explicitly. This argument is essentially:

1. Crowding leads to aggression in rats.
2. However, crowding does NOT lead to aggression in rhesus monkeys.
3. Therefore, crowding probably does NOT lead to aggression in monkeys the way it does in rats.

Statements 1 and 2 are premises. Statement 3 is our conclusion. The question you want to ask yourself is: "What assumption are they making in between statements 2 and 3?" That assumption is going to be the answer to this type of question.

In this example, you can't assume that the behavior of Rhesus monkeys would reflect the behavior of other monkeys. Although we could probably justify this statement if we watch a lot of Discovery Channel, we can't use that external knowledge on the GMAT. Answer choice C is a version of this assumption; it makes explicit the fact that rhesus monkeys are actually more aggressive than other monkeys. The natural next step of this chain of logic is that if crowding doesn't make rhesus monkeys act aggressively, it probably doesn't make any other monkeys act aggressively.

As a result, C is the best way to strengthen this conclusion. Hope that's helpful!

Brett

walker · Answer

C

In 1960’s studies of rats, scientists found that crowding increases the number of attacks
among the animals significantly. But in recent experiments in which   rhesus monkeys  
were placed in crowded conditions, although there was an increase in instances of
“coping” behavior—such as submissive gestures and avoidance of dominant
individuals—attacks did not become any more frequent. Therefore it is not likely that,
for   any species of monkey  , crowding increases aggression as significantly as was seen in
rats.

The assumption: Result for rhesus monkeys means the same result for any species of monkey

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

C. Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other monkeys do.
  Only C relates Rhesus monkeys to any other monkeys

hanumayamma · Answer

Conclusion: For any species of monkey, increase in crowding wasn’t caused aggression as significantly as was seen in rats.

A. All the observed forms of coping behavior can be found among rhesus monkeys living in uncrowded conditions.  Argument deals with crowding vs. aggression behavior. - This is irrelevant to the argument. ]

B. In the studies of rats, nondominant individuals were found to increasingly avoid dominant individuals when the animals were in crowded conditions.  The argument deals with any species of monkeys and with crowding vs. aggression behavior. - This is irrelevant to the argument. ]

C. Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other monkeys do. ( Hold it )

D. Some individual monkeys in the experiment were involved in significantly more attacks than the other monkeys were.  This is not about individual monkeys in experiment – Eliminate it ]

E. Some of the coping behavior displayed by rhesus monkeys is similar to behavior rhesus monkeys use to bring to an end an attack that has begun. This argument is not about coping behavior displayed by rhesus monkeys – eliminate it ]

Answer: C

Ellipse · Answer

(C) definately makes sense and strengthen the argument. But I am wondering that (A) also strengthens the argument by saying that all the "cpoing" behaviours are found among rhesus monkeys living in uncrowded conditions. Because if that is not the case, it simply means that the attacking nature has got increased.

@Brett, can you please through some light on this?

@Brett, can you please through some light on this?

BKimball · Answer

syog,

(A) gives us more information about rhesus monkeys: In crowded conditions, they cope in specific ways other than becoming aggressive. However, this only helps us better understand this particular species of monkey. We still have no idea whether this species is typical.

The goal with strengthening the conclusion questions is to understand which does the MOST to strengthen the conclusion. With (C) we can clearly see the strengthening. With (A) we have to tell ourselves a story to strengthen the argument: "Rhesus monkeys don't show aggression. They don't show aggression because they have other ways of coping, such as acting submissive. Since the rhesus monkey has an alternative to aggression, other monkeys probably do also."

Notice how this "story" we have to tell ourselves contains its own assumptions that still need to be overcome. Thus, although (A) might strengthen a bit, it doesn't strengthen the most.

Does that help?

Brett

crick20002002 · Answer

Premise: Experimentation done on Rhesus monkeys
Conclusion:
For any species of monkey,crowding DOES NOT increases aggression as significantly as was seen in rats.

The argument is a weak one as the conclusion does not follow directly from the premises - The argument generalizes results found on Rhesus monkeys with what will happen to all other species monkeys.

C strengthens the argument by stating that Rhesus monkeys are the most aggressive ones; other species will not be any more aggressive. Hence the findings on Rhesus monkeys is the worst case scenario

.

Crick

. Crick

Phoenix72 · Answer

Ans-C,

The conclusion is-Therefore it is not likely that, for any species of monkey,
crowding increases aggression as significantly as was seen in rats.

C.Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other monkeys do-Option C indicates that Rhesus are those species of monkey which respond with agression the most but these species did not show much agression in crowded conditions. Hence it implies that other species would also not respond that much.

venmic · Answer

Hi Experts

Can you please explain if my logic in choosing B is correct

Premise : in 1960’s studies of rats  crowding caused increase in attacks in rats
Premise 2: recent experiments recent experiments attacks did
not become any more frequent

implies : the attacks or behaviors in rats = attacks in R Monkeys
implies all monkeys attacks behaviors = attacks in behaviors in R monkeys

Concl: , for any species of monkey crowding increases aggression SAME for rats
Implies rats = monkeys

Prove: R monkeys not= monkeys then done

Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other
monkeys do. – C

is my understanding correct I feel the vvay im thinking on this is not the correct vvay to approach a problem like this

can yu please explain 1) vvhat am I missing
2) right approach

In 1960’s studies of rats, scientists found that crowding increases the number of attacks
among the animals significantly. But in recent experiments in which rhesus monkeys were
placed in crowded conditions, although there was an increase in instances of “coping”
behavior—such as submissive gestures and avoidance of dominant individuals—attacks did
not become any more frequent. Therefore it is not likely that, for any species of monkey,
crowding increases aggression as significantly as was seen in rats. Which of the
following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. All the observed forms of coping behavior can be found among rhesus monkeys living in
uncrowded conditions.
B. In the studies of rats, nondominant individuals were found to increasingly avoid dominant
individuals when the animals were in crowded conditions.
C. Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other
monkeys do.
D. Some individual monkeys in the experiment were involved in significantly more attacks than
the other monkeys were.
E. Some of the coping behavior displayed by rhesus monkeys is similar to behavior rhesus
monkeys use to bring to an end an attack that has begun.

mejia401 · Answer

OK - Gmat bot, here's we go.

Crowding of rats -> increased number of attacks for rats. However, crowding of monkeys ->(~) does not increase number of attacks for monkeys. Thus, strengthening any part of the causal relationship will strengthen the argument.

A. All the observed forms of coping behavior can be found among rhesus monkeys
living in uncrowded conditions.
 Reversing the causal logic does not strengthen the argument. The claim in fact weakens the argument.

B. In the studies of rats, nondominant individuals were found to increasingly avoid
dominant individuals when the animals were in crowded conditions.
 Weakens the conclusion because the original conclusion about rats was shown to be false.

C. Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any
other monkeys do.
 Correct. If monkeys respond to a wider range of stimuli and the number of attacks did not increase, the conclusion is expanded, thus further strengthened.

D. Some individual monkeys in the experiment were involved in significantly more
attacks than the other monkeys were.
 Tangential to the main issue, and out of scope.

E. Some of the coping behavior displayed by rhesus monkeys is similar to behavior
rhesus monkeys use to bring to an end an attack that has begun. 
 Out of scope.

IMO C

OptimusPrepJanielle · Answer

In 1960’s studies of rats, scientists found that crowding increases the number of attacks
among the animals significantly. But in recent experiments in which rhesus monkeys
were placed in crowded conditions, although there was an increase in instances of
“coping” behavior—such as submissive gestures and avoidance of dominant
individuals—attacks did not become any more frequent. Therefore it is not likely that,
for any species of monkey, crowding increases aggression as significantly as was seen in
rats.
 The conclusion is that since rhesus monkeys do not exhibit aggression in crowded conditions as rats do, other species do not either.  
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) All the observed forms of coping behavior can be found among rhesus monkeys
living in uncrowded conditions.  This implies that the coping behavior is not a result of the crowding and could weaken the argument. 
(B) In the studies of rats, nondominant individuals were found to increasingly avoid
dominant individuals when the animals were in crowded conditions.  Says nothing about monkeys 
 (C) Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any
other monkeys do.   If rhesus monkeys are more sensitive to the stimuli that induces aggression and still do not exhibit aggression, other monkey species are less likely to show aggression.  
(D) Some individual monkeys in the experiment were involved in significantly more
attacks than the other monkeys were.  Doesn't make a comparison from species to species. 
(E) Some of the coping behavior displayed by rhesus monkeys is similar to behavior
rhesus monkeys use to bring to an end an attack that has begun. The application of coping behavior to other situations is not relevant.

Abhishek009 · Answer

( in 1960s ) Rats - Crowding increases number of attacks ( Recent Experiments ) Rhesus monkeys - Coping behaviour , frequency of attacks did not increase. Any species of monkey , crowding increases aggression. The flow of information is from the Premises ( Rats and Rhesus monkeys ) monkeys to the Conclusion ( Any species of monkey ) Untitled.png If we apply the concept of pre thinking the first thing which must strike us is that " There must be some behavorial characteristics of the animals under consideration " C leads to the same - Rhesus monkeys respond with aggression to a wider range of stimuli than any other monkeys do. So, Rhesus monkeys also respond with aggression but under a different stimuli ( might be for food or any other issue ) and adopt the coping behaviour under stimulus such as " crowded conditions " So, we can come to the conclusion that " It is not likely that, for any species of monkey,crowding increases aggression as significantly as was seen in rats."

rs47 · Answer

I dont get how C is the answer... The conclusion here is about increase in aggression due to crowding as compared to that of rats.. Other species of monkeys may not respond aggressively to a wider range of stimuli but they could still respond quite aggressively to overcrowding, probably as aggressively as a rat does..

Please let me know where I am going wrong..

Thanks in advance..

OptimusPrepJanielle · Answer

Hi rs47,

Let me clarify your doubt here:

Desired flow of thoughts
1. We know that Rhesus monkeys do not act aggressively as the the rats do.
2. Rhesus monkeys are the most aggressive in nature (this is what option C says)
3. Rhesus monkeys do not become aggressive in over crowded conditions

4. Sine Rhesus monkeys who are the most aggressive of all the monkey species, we can say that other species will also not beome aggresive.
(The final conclusion including the correct assumption)

Does this help?

rs47 · Answer

Hi  OptimusPrepJanielle , thanks a lot for the response.. Just a small query, how did you arrive at the following premise?

"2. Rhesus monkeys are the most aggressive in nature"

Thanks in advance..

OptimusPrepJanielle · Answer

Hi rs47,

I think my language made you misunderstand my response. Sorry for that.
The points 1 2 and 3 are the flow of thoughts (taking into account the option C) which I have written before hand and then 4th point restates the assumption.

LogicGuru1 · Answer

C is the correct answer. 
 
Amongst all types of monkeys rhesus monkey respond aggressively to a wide range of things. Now it means they get angry often and get angry on a lots of things. They are the angriest of all monkeys. Now if the angriest of all (these rhesus) did not responded aggressively to crowding, the other varieties of monkeys which are comparatively more milder and gentler then rhesus will not also respond to the crowding.

An analogy will be IF a gladiator someone can fight with a ferocious tiger without any fear then it is logical to think that he would NOT be afraid to fight with a goat. Similarly if over crowding is not making rhesus (who gets violent easily) aggressive, then other monkeys might not get aggressive either .

DharLog · Answer

A. It is the same as option C in the original question. See the previous post. It strengthens the argument.
C. Again, no link. Gives us nothing.
D, E are same as in original question.

B. Nice one. Why does this option weaken the argument? Because. See this chain
Monkeys are put in crowded conditions ---> they become more uncomfortable, more agressive ---> it is bad for them ---> so they adopt coping behaviour to forestall acts of agression between them.
So they become more agressive! But by coping behaviour they lessen their agression

nishg13 · Answer

The latest answer as per GMAC - Coping behavior was adopted by the crowded monkeys to forestall acts of aggression among them.

In 1960s studies of rats, scientists found that crowding increases

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

In 1960s studies of rats, scientists found that crowding increases

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia