The statements above, if true,

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: no relation5% picked this

   Among the blackbirds that survived the month-long study, there was no relation between

   It seems like the paragraph is closer to suggesting the opposite of this. The final fact is a general statement that smaller blackbirds are generally younger. This answer is talking about the surviving pool of smaller birds and larger birds. It's saying, among this population, it would no longer be the case that the smaller ones were generally younger. Why not? We'd assume that whether you're one of the unlucky ones who died or the lucky ones who survived, you're still subject to the generalization that smaller birds tend to be younger birds.

   5%
2. B

   Opposite8% picked this

   Larger blackbirds of a given age are actually more likely to survive over a one-month period than are smaller

   According to the paragraph, the smaller/younger birds were more likely to survive this one month study. The author thinks it's because they're younger. Yasukawa thinks it's because they're smaller. This answer is saying that being larger is helping birds to survive longer. No one in the passage was saying that.

   8%
3. C

   Opposite7% picked this

   Among blackbirds of the same size, a difference in age probably does not indicate a difference in chances of survival

   According to the paragraph, the smaller/younger birds were more likely to survive this one month study. Yasukawa thinks it's because they're smaller. The author thinks it's because they're younger. So the author would say, "size wasn't the causal difference-maker here, age was. If you took two birds of the same size, the younger one would have the higher chance of living longer."

   7%
4. D

   Correct76% picked this

   Among blackbirds of the same age, a difference in size may not indicate a difference in chances of

   Why this is right

   We're very attracted to the weak wording of "may not indicate". According to the paragraph, the smaller/younger birds were more likely to survive this one month study. Yasukawa thinks it's because they're smaller. The author thinks it's because they're younger. The paragraph says that Yasukawa's conclusion "is probably mistaken". The question stem told us to treat the statements as true, so it's true to say that "size is probably not a determinant of a blackbird's chances of survival". That supports this answer (phrased even more weakly), which says that "a difference in size may not indicate a difference in chance of survival".

   Skill tested: Most Supported · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   76%
5. E

   Too Strong: the same3% picked this

   With a larger sample of blackbirds, the percentage of smaller birds that survive a one-month period would be the same as the

   It's too extreme to predict an identical percentage occurring, in some counterfactual. Also, this answer is acting like we got skewed data because our sample size was small. We have no reason to think a larger sample size would have found an identical percentage of smaller/larger birds surviving.

   3%