As annoying as it is to miss a question for a reason that feels petty, I think there's a broader point here. If there are multiple possible reasonable interpretations of a term (and while I think the predominant definition of animals infused insects, I certainly have heard people distinguish them) it's important to consider if there's another interpretation that would make an answer choice correct.
DesHarpon May 12 at 07:08AM
I fail to see how this is about "animal communication" more than the controversy of the manner in which bee's do so. Both articles include different opinions in addition to that of the authors not to mention I also cannot wrap my head around the idea of classifying a bee as an animal when it is an insect. The answer was giving too board to be correct, so I eliminated it.
Emil-Kunkinon May 12 at 03:43PM
Both topics are about how various animals communicate. While C is way more high level than I would have expected, it does describe the two passages. The first passage is just about how bees communicate, the second discusses the communication of several, including bees as well as others. This is a hard thing to pick up, and personally I had to just brute-force remind myself of it, but in RC, too broad is really not a reason for something to be wrong. It is a reason to think very critically about it, but as long as an answer choice answers the question, broadness isn't really a problem.
Also, insects are animals. This is just a factual matter but it does trip people up on this question.
