by giladedelman Sat Sep 17, 2011 5:06 pm
Thanks for posting.
I have some thoughts here. For starters, I don't actually see any psychological hypothesis presented here. I see some observations about human behavior drawn from the field of psychology ("recent investigations into the psychology of decision making), but I'm not sure where the passage presents some theory or hypothesis.
But a better reason to get rid of (B) is that nothing is "subjected to a political test case." Rather, the discussion of the Falklands War is offered as an example of the application of the psychology of decision making to the field of government risk taking. A test case, by contrast, is something designed to test the veracity of a theory or idea, rather than simply provide an example of it.
(D) is the best answer here because it pretty neatly outlines what the passage does: we start off with a discussion of these "new psychological considerations" (which is more supported than "hypothesis"), and conclude with an example of how they apply to another field, that is, the field of government risk taking.
(A) is incorrect because this isn't a "psychological analysis," it's merely a discussion of psychological research.
(C) is sort of backwards; the passage suggests that people who study politics and government could use this psychology stuff, not that psychologists should use political science.
(E) is out because there is no second "avenue" or perspective offered.
Does that answer your question?