Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

5
  • This does appear to be the only correct answer. Thank you for clarifying! Commented Sep 27, 2025 at 14:42
  • please - can you simplify, or expound on, your last paragraph? as this is a SAT question, kindly explain it like i'm 15 years old? what do you mean by "To preserve admissibility of a negative correlation"? Dale M's answer didn't contend "a negative correlation" by the bye, doesn't your last paragraph overcomplicate the correlation? isn't "positive correlation between "reduced heart rate" and "increased attention" the same as NEGATIVE correlation between "heart rate" and "increased attention"? if so, clearer to frame this correlation as NEGATIVE between "heart rate" and "increased attention"? Commented Nov 30, 2025 at 7:33
  • @user196764 "Dale M's answer didn't contend "a negative correlation"". Exactly. It did not, and it cannot. Evidencing a negative correlation between certain condition and the claimed effect would weaken the critic's claim more directly than evidencing that a condition is irrelevant to (i.e., compatible with) said claim. The statement "To preserve [...]" explains how the description does not support a finding of negative correlation. "clearer to frame this correlation as NEGATIVE between "heart rate" and "increased attention"?" I phrased my rationale in terms of researchers' propositions. Commented Dec 6, 2025 at 21:50
  • doesn't your last paragraph overcomplicate the correlation? isn't "positive correlation between "reduced heart rate" and "increased attention" the same as NEGATIVE correlation between "heart rate" and "increased attention"? if so, clearer to frame this correlation as NEGATIVE between "heart rate" and "increased attention"? Commented Dec 13, 2025 at 2:48
  • 1
    @user196764 The point of that statement isn't merely to summarize the correlation between heart rate and attention, but to explain why the phrasing of the scenario falls short of supporting the critic's rationale. Commented Dec 13, 2025 at 22:06