Question 73·200 Super-Hard SAT Reading Questions·Information and Ideas
Juvenile zebra finches exposed to several adult songs often copy one song disproportionately. Researchers propose that a juvenile selects a song as its model by detecting contingent social feedback—that is, a tutor song reliably produced in response to that juvenile’s own calls—rather than merely because the song is frequent, comes from nearby, or happens to follow calls made by any juvenile.
Which finding, if true, would most strongly support the researchers’ proposal?
For a command-of-evidence question about a causal mechanism, translate every part of the claim into a condition the evidence should test. Then prefer the finding that experimentally changes the proposed mechanism while matching exposure and other alternatives; a close distractor may show the predicted correlation without establishing that the proposed mechanism caused the outcome.
Hints
Attend to whose calls matter
The proposal distinguishes responses to a particular juvenile’s own calls from responses associated with juvenile calls generally.
Control the alternatives
Look for evidence that keeps song frequency and source constant rather than allowing either factor to explain the copying preference.
Compare identical experiences carefully
A strong design would expose two listeners to the same external playback sequence while changing how that sequence relates to each listener’s behavior.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify the precise claim
The proposal is not merely that prompt tutor responses matter. It specifically claims that a juvenile detects whether a song is produced in response to its own calls, rather than responding to frequency, proximity, or songs associated with calls generally.
Look for a matched comparison
The strongest evidence should give different juveniles the same songs, the same number of playbacks, and the same overall sequence while changing only whether the sequence is linked to the listening juvenile’s own calls.
Connect the result to the mechanism
In the correct finding, the paired juveniles receive identical playback sequences, but the sequence is self-contingent for only one bird. A copying preference appears only in those birds, showing that exposure and general timing are insufficient without the proposed individual-specific contingency.