Examine the situation.


Lloyd is studying the effect of breakfast cereal on the health of rats. He suspects that the cereal may be unhealthy. He feeds rats various amounts of breakfast cereal over a six-week period. He weighs the rats using a digital lab balance at the beginning of the experiment and then again at the end of the experiment. Then, he calculates the change in weight.

When writing the conclusion of his report, Lloyd states that the breakfast cereal is not a healthy choice for school children since it causes them to gain weight unnecessarily.

What component of scientific argumentation is missing from Lloyds work?

appropriate equipment for use in the experiment

graphs and tables in the written report

empirical data that supports his claim

accurate measurements made during the experiment

B?

In scientific argumentation, however, explanations are generated, verified, communicated, debated, and modified. Ideally, the goal of all participants in scientific argumentation is to refine and build consensus for scientific ideas, based on evidence, to come as close as possible to understanding the reality of the natural world.

I would go with C over B

just took the test and empirical data is correct :3

ok, thank you

I think it's C, because I took a checkpoint and it was "empirical data that supports his claim."

Yes, the component of scientific argumentation that is missing from Lloyd's work is accurate measurements made during the experiment. While he did weigh the rats using a digital lab balance at the beginning and end of the experiment and calculated the change in weight, Lloyd's conclusion would have been more scientifically supported if he had provided specific numerical data that shows the correlation between the breakfast cereal and the weight gain in the rats.