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, it was not such attacks that increased significantly, but rather instances of "coping" behavior, such as submissive gestures, avoidance of dominant individuals, and huddling with relatives. Therefore the evidence from rhesus monkeys makes it doubtful that crowding significantly increases aggressive impulses in primates.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) The rhesus monkeys is the species of monkey that is more prone to fighting

(B) Coping behavior was adopted by the crowded monkeys to forestall acts of aggression among them

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

(D) Some individual monkeys in the experiment were involved in more attacks than the others

(E) Some of the rhesus monkeys in the experiment were subjected to levels of crowding that are unlikely to occur in natural circumstances.

The argument cites evidence that a recent experiment shows that crowding resulted in increased instances of coping - submissive gestures.
Based on this evidence argument concludes that crowding does not result in aggression.

Let us check each option and see which option weakens this argument.

A. This does not relate to our main argument (what is the behaviour of rhesus monkeys when they are in a crowded atmosphere). Ignore this option.

B. This option discusses both key ideas: Coping behavior as well as aggression. Hold

C. Irrelevant to our argument. We have to discuss their behaviour in crowded conditions. Ignore this option.

D. Very subjective information. Not strong enough to support or weaken conclusion. Ignore this option.

E. Issue is not about contrasting this experiment with natural circumstances. Ignore this option.


By elimination also , B comes out as winner.

Let us quickly analyse it.

B says that Coping behaviour was infact an outcome to stop aggressive behaviour. So aggression was there and the submissive gestures were developed by group members for their protection. In light of this information, we cannot say that crowding does not cause aggression.

[Argument is saying thus: Suppose A, B and C are 3 events

Earlier experiment (Rat) says A --> B (A causes B. Crowding causes Aggression)

Present Argument says, we saw that C occurred. so

A does not cause B. It causes C.

Correct Option says that the logical flow is that

A --> B --> C . ]

There is a sampling issue with the conclusion !!
as aditi already mentioned , experiments were done on rhesus monkeys while the conclusion is held true for all primates.
C.. for me best explains the reason for rhesus monkeys behaviour because of which the conclusion cannot be held true for all primates .

little confused here !!
now I think answer can be b !!
I don't think C weakens the conclusion at all . If the monkeys are observed to have all kinds on coping behaviour in un crowded envt , they might have the same in crowded as well , it in fact strengthens the conclusion.

Not able to pick between b and c

daagh chetan2u

Posted from my mobile device

Hi,
In b, do u mean that a few monkeys are getting aggressive but there are other few which counter balance this by coping, hence resulting in no attacks?

Posted from my mobile device

In the 1960 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, it was not such attacks that increased significantly but rather instances of "coping" behavior, such as submissive gestures, avoidance of dominant individuals, and huddling with relatives. Therefore the evidence from rhesus monkeys makes it doubtful that crowding significantly increases aggressive impulses in primates.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument.

A. The rhesus monkey is the species of monkey that is most prone to fighting.
B. Coping behavior was adopted by the crowded monkeys to forestall acts of aggression among them.
C. All the observed forms of coping behavior can be found among rhesus monkeys living in uncrowded conditions.
D. Some individual monkeys in the experiments were involved in more attacks than others.
E. Some of the rhesus monkeys in the experiments were subjected to levels of crowding that are unlikely to occur in natural circumstances.

From the weakening question above, we need to attack the conclusion, which stated crowding is not triger aggresive behavior. Statement B attack this conclusion by saying crowding implulse agrresive behavior, which the monkey not express it because they want to forestall the act of aggresive

Notice that the conclusion is about aggressive IMPULSES, not the number of attacks: "Therefore the evidence from rhesus monkeys makes it doubtful that crowding significantly increases aggressive impulses in primates. "

Because the number of attacks did not increase, the author concludes that aggressive impulses did not significantly increase. But what if aggressive impulses actually DID increase, and the monkeys simply adopted coping behavior to prevent those impulses from leading to actual attacks? In that case, aggressive impulses could have significantly increased even though the actual number of attacks did not increase.

Choice (B) explains this possibility, which goes against the author's reasoning.
_________________

I understand that B is a weakener, C is a strengthener but I am unable to knock off D.
Can experts pl explain me how D is irrlevant. If some monkeys were involved in more attacks than the others then definitely the attacks did take place and attacks can logically take place because of aggression or aggressive impulses. This scenario, in turn, tends to weaken the conclusion.
Can someone pl correct me.