Question

The scientists in Study 3 hypothesized that the larger the volume of lava produced, the larger the number of marine organisms that would become extinct. If this hypothesis is correct, the formation of which of the following plateaus caused the largest number of marine organisms to become extinct? F. Plateau A G. Plateau B H. Plateau \(C\) J. Plateau D

Short answer

Answer: No, we cannot determine which plateau caused the largest number of marine organisms to become extinct due to the lack of data on lava volumes and marine extinctions for each plateau.

Step-by-step solution

Analyze the given information

Based on the hypothesis, we can establish a direct relationship between the volume of lava produced and the number of marine organisms that become extinct. The higher the lava volume, the higher the number of extinctions. Now, we need to find the plateau with the highest lava volume.

Determine the plateau with the largest volume of lava produced

We do not have any information on the lava volumes or the number of extinctions for each plateau. So, we need to start by either finding the data related to these plateaus or rely on additional information given in the exercise. In this case, no further information is provided; hence, we cannot directly establish which plateau had the largest lava volume.

Use logic and reasoning

We can't calculate the volume of lava produced by each plateau due to the lack of data. However, we can still reason about which plateau is most likely to have caused the most marine organism extinctions as we have the hypothesis which establishes a direct relationship between the lava volume and marine extinctions. Considering that, we should pick the plateau with the most indication of causing the most extinctions. Since we don't have any data, we can't determine which plateau that is. Therefore, we can't confirm which plateau caused the largest number of marine organisms to become extinct.

Key concepts

Hypothesis Testing

Hypothesis testing is a fundamental aspect of scientific inquiry that involves making a conjecture based on existing knowledge and then examining if subsequent data and observations support this conjecture. In the context of the ACT Science Reasoning section—and specifically in the example problem provided—we look at hypothesis testing as the process of comparing predicted outcomes, in this case, the relationship between lava volume and marine extinctions, to actual results.

Understanding hypothesis testing requires students to not only recognize what the hypothesis is but also to identify how to test it. Often, as demonstrated in the example problem, students must deal with incomplete data. When faced with such challenges, using logical reasoning to infer possible conclusions becomes essential. However, it's important to keep in mind that without the necessary data to test the hypothesis, we cannot draw definitive conclusions.

For students, improving hypothesis testing skills involves:

• Clearly defining what the hypothesis predicts.
• Identifying relevant variables that can be measured or observed.
• Gathering adequate data to test the hypothesis.
• Analysing the data to see if it supports or refutes the hypothesis.
• Being prepared to use logic and reasoning when data is incomplete.

It's also crucial to remember that a hypothesis can either be rejected or fail to be rejected, but it is not necessarily 'proven.'

Scientific Reasoning

Scientific reasoning is the methodology behind thinking like a scientist. It includes forming hypotheses, making predictions, designing experiments, collecting data, and drawing conclusions. On the ACT Science Reasoning test, students are often required to utilize scientific reasoning to interpret experiments and studies, even when all the data isn't available to them, as seen in the given exercise.

In the exercise, students must use reasoning to determine the impact of lava volume on marine organism extinction without having explicit data. The challenge lies in applying scientific principles and logical analysis to make an educated guess. This process trains students to think critically and make decisions based on limited information, a valuable skill in many real-world situations.

To enhance scientific reasoning, students should focus on:

• Developing a strong understanding of scientific concepts and vocabulary.
• Practicing the interpretation of data from tables, charts, and graphs.
• Making connections between scientific principles and real-world phenomena.
• Applying logical deduction to interpret incomplete data sets.

This skill does not merely apply to theoretical scenarios but is also imperative for any field that relies on data analysis and evidence-based decision-making.

Data Interpretation

Data interpretation refers to the process of analyzing and drawing conclusions from data, which is essential for testing hypotheses and supporting scientific reasoning. In the context of the ACT Science Reasoning section, students are often presented with charts, graphs, and tables from which they must extract and evaluate information to answer questions.

The exercise provided illustrates the necessity of interpreting data to substantiate a hypothesis about marine extinctions caused by lava flows. Without explicit numbers, students face the challenge of using given information—such as the size of lava plateaus—to infer potential outcomes.

To excel in data interpretation, students should practice the following:

• Analyzing different types of data presentations, such as graphs and tables.
• Identifying trends, patterns, and relationships within the data.
• Understanding the implications of data in the context of the presented hypothesis.
• Correlating scientific knowledge with the interpreted data to make logical assertions.

By refining these skills, students can better handle questions on the ACT Science Reasoning test that require them to make educated guesses in the absence of complete information. Data interpretation forms the backbone of evidence-based conclusions in both academic and real-life settings.