PT138.S4.Q9 > Question

SECTION 1 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22

PASSAGE 4

Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 2 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · lr

Why did the second study report a smaller percent of plants as having patterned stems than did the earlier study, even though the two studies covered approximately the same geographical area?

The correct answer should help differentiate the second study from the first in a way that could lead to a smaller proportion of the plants being reported to have patterned stems.

How populous the plant was during the study doesn’t impact the proportion of those plants with patterned stems. In the 1st study, 70% were reported to have patterned stems, and in the 2nd, that % went down. The number of plants in each study doesn’t impact % with patterned stems.

We’re trying to explain the decrease in % reported to have patterned stems in a particular species of plants. What happened with other plant species has no impact.

The comparative number of plants in the studies doesn’t impact the proportion of those plants with patterned stems. In the 1st study, 70% were reported to have patterned stems. In the 2nd, that % went down. The number of plants in each study doesn’t impact % with patterned stems.

A broader definition of “patterned” in the first study means that in the first study, any given plant was more likely to be considered “patterned” than in the second study. This could explain why the % reported to have patterned stems decreased in the second study.

Whether counting patterned stems was a primary or secondary goal doesn’t explain why the % reported to have patterned stems decreased in the second study. We have no reason to think the focus of the study would change the likelihood a given plant would be counted as patterned.

PrepTest 138 - Section 4 - Question 9

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action