The stimulus tells us that people with amusia can perceive timing. It does not tell us they perceive timing better than people without amusia. "Compensate by developing a heightened perception" is a claim about how amusia individuals compare to non-amusia individuals, and we have zero information about that comparison. We only know how pitch perception and timing perception compare within people who have amusia.

The stimulus tells us that people with amusia can't discern pitch but can discern timing. If amusia were primarily a timing problem, we'd expect these volunteers to struggle with timing. They don't. If amusia were primarily a pitch problem, we'd expect them to struggle with pitch. They do. That pattern supports the claim that amusia is driven more by the pitch side than the timing side.

Note that (B) doesn't claim pitch is the only factor in amusia or that timing plays no role at all. It just says "more from...than from," which is a comparative claim. The experimental results, where pitch perception is broken and timing perception is intact, support that comparison. Also, if you don't like this answer, keep in mind that this isn't a Must Be True question.

The experiment tested whether people with amusia could discern pitch shifts between individual tones. It found they couldn't. (C) claims these same people could discern pitch if the tones were embedded in a melody and they could rely on timing cues. That's an interesting hypothesis, but we have no evidence for it.

Watch the extreme language: "not at all." The stimulus tells us that people with amusia have intact timing perception but impaired pitch perception. That's consistent with pitch being important for distinguishing melodies, but it doesn't prove timing plays zero role. Maybe both pitch and timing matter for telling melodies apart, and people with amusia struggle because the pitch side is broken. The stimulus gives us no reason to rule out timing as a contributing factor.

The stimulus describes what people with amusia can and can't perceive. It says nothing about whether either ability is learned or innate. (E) introduces a distinction (learned vs. innate) that the stimulus doesn't touch.