One hundred people listened to a single musical composition, “Study I,” on a certain morning. █████ ████ ████ ████ ████████ ██ ████████ ████ █████ ███ ██ ███████ ███████ ████████████ ████████ ██████ ███ ████ █████ █████ ████ ██████████ █ ███████████ ████████ █████████ ████████ ██ █████ ███████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██████ █████ ████ ████ █████ ██ ██ ███████ ████████ ██ █████ ████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ █████ █████
The argument concludes that people generally prefer music they have heard before over new music. This is supported by an experimental study with 100 participants. Each participant listened to Study I in the morning, and later in the day, listened to both Study I and Study II. At this time, most of them preferred Study I.
However, this experiment has an important flaw: it lacks a control group, so the result could just be because Study I is a better piece of music. To improve the strength of this evidence, we want to eliminate that alternative explanation and show that the result was truly due to hearing Study I previously.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ ████ ███████████ ███ █████████
Half of the ███████ ██ █ █████ █████ ██ ██████ ███ █████ ████ ████████ █████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ █████ ████ ████████ ████ ███ ████████ █████ █████ ███ ████ ███ █████████ ████████ █████
This only weakens the argument, by supporting the alternative explanation that the experimental result just came down to Study I being a better composition.
Ninety percent of ███ ███████ ██ █ █████ █████ ██ ██████ ███ ████████ ██ ████████ ████ ███ ████████ █████ ███████ ██████ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ████████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████ █████████ ████████ █████
People like Study I more even if they haven't heard it before! This provides evidence for the alternative explanation that Study I is just a better piece of music, which weakens the argument.
The group of ███ ██████ ███ ████████ ██ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ ██ ████ ████████ ████ ███ ████████ █████ █████ ███ ████ ███ ████████ ████ ████████████ █████ ████████
We don't know how many professional music critics were in the group, or which composition they preferred, so (C) doesn't affect the argument at all. There's not enough information here to support (or cast doubt on) the experimental sample.
Of 80 people ███ █████ ████ ████████ █████ ██ ███ ███████ ███ █████ ████ ████████ ████ ███ ████████ █████ █████ ███ ████ ████ ██ █████████ ████████ ██████
(D) gives us the control group we're looking for, to help eliminate the alternative explanation that Study I is just a better piece of music. No matter which piece people hear first, that's the one they prefer, which strengthens the hypothesis that previous listening influences preference.
Many of the ███ ██████ ███ ██ ███ ███████ ████████ ████ ██ ████████ ████ ██████████ █████████ ████ ████ ███ ███ ████ ████ ██ ████ ████ ████ █████ ████ ███ ████ ███████
So did all the participants even count as having heard Study I previously? (E) casts doubt on the experimental procedure, which only weakens the argument.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnostic