Question

To dust or not to dust? Residents are up in arms about the crop dusters that fly over the area from May through October, spraying insecticides and fungicides over cotton, peanuts, corn, and soybeans. Non-farming residents insist that the spray is causing an increase in respiratory problems among residents as well as a spike in the incidence of lung cancer. They want the crop dusting to stop! Farmers have hired a research group to investigate the claims of local residents. What comment would you make about the farmers attempt to satisfy local residents?

A) The farmers idea is a good one since the researchers do not live in the area.
B) Let the residents also hire a group to conduct the research and analyze the data.
C) The agricultural chemical industry would be better suited to conduct the research.
D) The research group hired by the farmers may present a biased picture of the situation.

Answer 1

The correct answer is D)

Step-by-step explanation:

Here's why:

The research group hired by the farmers may present a biased picture of the situation. An outside agency, one that is not paid by either the residents or the farmers, would be the best group to conduct research and analyze the results in order to find an unbiased solution to the problem. There should be no local involvement in data collection or analysis since any local residents, farmers, or politicians, have their own agenda.

Answer 2

The correct answer is option D) "The research group hired by the farmers may present a biased picture of the situation".

Step-by-step explanation:

One of the basic premises of a reliable scientific investigation is that the researches should not have any conflict of interest. A research group hired by farmers to investigate the claims of local residents regarding the use of insecticides and fungicides most likely would not act unbiased. The proper way to perform the research is to hire an independent research group that would not have any conflict of interest in the matter of study.