PrepTest 138

Incorrect. The impact of hunting on the seal population can be inferred, but that's not directly tied to hunting practices not varying, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. There's no discussion of health, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. There's no information about what happened before the time period, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. While hunting is mentioned in the stimulus, there's no discussion of Nativve peoples limiting their hunting to preserve seal populations. While it is inferrable that the seal population size was stable, there's no indication that that result was intentional.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
Relationship - The smaller the average seal size, the larger the population
Archaeologists - The average seal size didn't change in North America during an 800-years period

Answer Anticipation:
If the average seal size is a reliable indicator of the population size, and the average seal size didn't change in a certain location over a period of time, then we can infer that the population didn't change much during that time period. Since it connects that period to seal hunting, there's a good chance the correct answer will, too—possibly by saying that the hunting wasn't at a high enough level to impact population size.

Answer Explanation:
Since body size is a reliable indicator of population, and body size didn't change, we can infer that population size was stable. Since hunting happened while population size was stable, we can infer that hunting didn't significantly reduce the population size.

Key Takeaway:
This stimulus featured a relationship that was established, and then it was applied to a specific case. When a relationship like this one is established—a directly or inversely proportional relationship, or an equivalence between two measurements—expect its application in a given case by bringing up one element of the relationship, allowing an inference to be made about the other element.