Self-study
In Yasukawa's month-long study of blackbirds, the percentage of smaller birds that survived the duration of the study exceeded the percentage of larger birds that survived. ████████ ██████████ ██████████ ████ ████ ██ █ ███████████ ██ █ ███████████ ███████ ██ ████████ ████ █ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████████ █████████ █████ ███████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ███████ ████ ██████ █████
WTF Kind Of Question Is This?
It’s best to think of this as a Weaken question – our job is to provide a new piece of information that, if true, bolsters Yasukawa’s position and undermines the author’s position.
When a question stem uses uncommon wording, it’s critical to make sure you’re clear on its exact meaning. The right answer to this question, for example, is super easy to dismiss if you think this is an MSS question.
Argument Structure
Yasukawa concluded that size determines survival chances. Specifically, he concluded that smaller is better (for survival). Our author thinks this conclusion is wrong because age is a potential confounding factor. Smaller birds are younger birds, so perhaps the survival rates Yasukawa observed are actually due to age-related factors.
In short, the author accuses Yasukawa’s study of not controlling for age. Since our job is to defend Yasukawa’s position against the author’s attack, we’re looking for information that indicates Yasukawa did control for age – reasons to think the small vs. large blackbirds weren’t actually different ages.
4.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ █████████ ████ ███ █████████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████ ██ █ ████████████████ ██ ███
a
Yasukawa compared the ████████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████ ██ ███████████ █ ██████ ███ █ ███████ ████████ ██████ ████ ██ █████████ █████ ██ █████ ██████ ███ ████████
If this were true, it would indicate that the blackbirds’ species accounts for the size differences between the groups, making it much less likely that the size difference was due to Yasukawa's failure to control for age.
b
Yasukawa examined blackbirds ██ █████ ███████ ███████ ██████ ████ ██ ██████████
Irrelevant. Yasukawa studying blackbirds in their natural habitat wouldn’t provide any relevant information about how size and age were considered in the study, which is what the author’s objection hinges on.
c
Yasukawa did not ███████ ███ ████████ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████ █████ ██ █████ █████ ██ ██████
All the claims in this stimulus – from both Yasukawa and the author – strictly compare some blackbirds to other blackbirds. Other species of birds aren't relevant to this conversation.
d
Yasukawa noted that ███ ██████ ██████████ ███ ████ ███████ ██ ██████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ███████████
We're looking for information that distinguishes age from size as potential causes of the difference in survival rates. Learning that smaller birds more often lose fights would only split the difference between age and size if fighting well were an obviously age-but-not-size based (or size-but-not-age based) skill.
e
Yasukawa noted that ███ ██████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████ ████ ██████ ███████████ ██████ ███████████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ███████████
This arguably weakens both positions (the author's and Yasukawa's) by presenting a third potential cause aside from both age and size. Information about social hierarchies would only be relevant if social hierarchies were an obviously age-but-not-size related thing.