DISCUSSION: When a question quotes a specific line, you should read around that line for context. You can answer this question simply be reading the full sentence, which is the second sentence of paragraph 2.
Social scientists valued things that were ‘scientifically rigorous’. They avoided studying dance, so presumably they thought that they couldn’t study dance with scientific rigor.
The ‘peers’ are those judging the social scientists’ work. If you’re a social scientist, your peers will decide if your work is scientifically rigorous and therefore valuable.
- The second sentence of paragraph 2 indicates that social scientists largely ignored dance. So the ‘peers’ wouldn’t have had an opinion on whether dance was interpreted correctly or incorrectly.
- The second sentence of paragraph 2 says that social scientists didn’t think that research on dance could be scientifically rigorous. Therefore they would probably think that it’s difficult for social scientists to obtain reliable data, even if those social scientists were well versed in dance traditions.
- CORRECT. This is why social scientists avoided studying dance. They feared that their peers would not think dance could be studied with scientific rigor. See the second sentence of paragraph 2.
- Last two lines of paragraph 2 explain why dance experts didn’t study dance ethnology. It was because they weren’t trained in social science. It had nothing to do with being preoccupied.
- It’s true that social scientists don’t think that dance can be studied with rigor. But the second sentence of paragraph 2 don’t say why rigor was impossible. The passage doesn’t say anything about dance forms being too variable.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions