Scientists previously thought that all electric eels belong to a single species, but a team of researchers led by zoologist...
GMAT Craft and Structure : (Structure) Questions
Scientists previously thought that all electric eels belong to a single species, but a team of researchers led by zoologist C. David de Santana proved this idea wrong by ________ that there are in fact three distinct species of electric eels.
Which choice completes the text with the most logical and precise word or phrase?
pretending
complaining
requiring
demonstrating
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Create Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "Scientists previously thought that all electric eels belong to a single species," |
|
| "but a team of researchers led by zoologist C. David de Santana proved this idea wrong by" |
|
| "[MISSING WORD/PHRASE]" |
|
| "that there are in fact three distinct species of electric eels." |
|
Part B: Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Researchers proved that the previous scientific belief about electric eels belonging to one species was wrong—there are actually three distinct species.
Argument Flow: The passage presents a classic scientific correction narrative: it starts with what scientists used to think (one species), then introduces research that contradicted this view, and concludes with the new, corrected understanding (three species).
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
This is a fill-in-the-blank question asking us to choose the best logical connector. The answer must create the right relationship between what comes before and after the blank.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The word must describe how the researchers "proved this idea wrong"
- It needs to logically connect the action of proving with the evidence that follows
- The word should indicate that the researchers showed or established the new finding
- It must make sense with "that there are in fact three distinct species"
- The right answer should describe the action of showing or establishing evidence that contradicts the previous belief
pretending
pretending
✗ Incorrect
- This would mean the researchers were faking or acting as if there are three species
- This contradicts the idea that they "proved" the old idea wrong—you can't prove something by pretending
- Makes no logical sense in the context of scientific research
complaining
complaining
✗ Incorrect
- This would mean researchers expressed dissatisfaction about there being three species
- Complaining doesn't prove anything wrong—it's just expressing unhappiness
- Doesn't fit with the scientific context of disproving a theory
requiring
requiring
✗ Incorrect
- This would mean researchers demanded that there be three species
- You can't prove a scientific fact by requiring it to be true
- Students might be confused by the formal sound of "requiring," but it doesn't match the logical relationship needed
demonstrating
demonstrating
✓ Correct
- This means the researchers showed or proved through evidence that there are three species
- Perfectly fits the logical flow: they proved the old idea wrong by demonstrating the new evidence
- Matches the scientific context where researchers demonstrate findings through research and evidence