Read the following experimental statement and the given courses of action, and then decide which course of action logically follows from the statement, assuming it is fully true. Statement: Properly fed and starved monkeys were made to run through a network of paths designed as a puzzle. It was observed that the starved monkeys could not run faster. This has been used to support the claim that people with lower intelligence in poor countries are victims of malnutrition. Courses of action: a. The effects of nutrition on the intelligence of monkeys are parallel to those on human beings. b. Captive monkeys are more intelligent than wild monkeys.

Introduction / Context:
This question, although placed under course of action, is conceptually similar to an assumptions problem. The statement describes an experiment on monkeys and then uses the result to support a claim about human intelligence and malnutrition in poor countries. You are asked to determine which of the given statements must be taken as true for the conclusion to make sense and therefore logically follows as an underlying assumption or necessary link.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Two groups of monkeys, properly fed and starved, were run through a puzzle like network of paths.
• The starved monkeys could not run faster than the properly fed monkeys.
• This observation is used to claim that people with lower intelligence in poor countries are victims of malnutrition.
• There is an implied link between nutrition and performance in a puzzle task.

Concept / Approach:
In such reasoning:

• We look for hidden assumptions necessary to move from the experimental result to the human conclusion.
• A valid assumption should connect the experiment on monkeys to the claim about humans.
• Statements that introduce unrelated ideas or extra information are not valid assumptions.

The courses of action a and b here are really possible assumptions rather than actions, so we evaluate them accordingly.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Understand the argument structure. The argument is: malnutrition reduced the performance of starved monkeys in a puzzle test, therefore human beings in poor countries who are malnourished have lower intelligence. This clearly compares monkey behaviour with human intelligence. Step 2: Evaluate statement a. It says that the effects of nutrition on the intelligence of monkeys are parallel to those on human beings. If this is not assumed, then we cannot use an experiment on monkeys to draw a conclusion about human intelligence. Therefore, for the conclusion regarding people in poor countries to be meaningful, this assumption must hold. So a logically follows as a necessary underlying assumption. Step 3: Evaluate statement b. It claims that captive monkeys are more intelligent than wild monkeys. This has nothing to do with the argument relating nutrition to performance in the puzzle or to intelligence in poor human populations. Whether monkeys are captive or wild does not affect the logic of moving from the experiment to the conclusion about humans. Step 4: Decide which statements follow. Since a is essential for the argument to be valid and b is irrelevant, only a follows.

Verification / Alternative check:
Try removing assumption a. If the effects of nutrition on monkeys and humans are not parallel, the entire comparison collapses, and the conclusion about people in poor countries becomes unjustified. On the other hand, even if b were false, that is, if captive monkeys were not more intelligent than wild ones, the experiment result and the human conclusion would remain unaffected. Hence, a is necessary while b is not, which confirms our evaluation.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only b follows: Incorrect because b does not connect to the given conclusion and is unnecessary for the reasoning.
• Both a and b follow: Incorrect since b is unrelated to the claim about human intelligence and malnutrition.
• Neither a nor b follows: Incorrect because without a, the link from monkeys to humans cannot be established.

Common Pitfalls:
Students sometimes treat every statement related to the experiment as a valid assumption. However, logical reasoning questions require that an assumption must be essential for the conclusion. Another common mistake is to overlook cross species generalisation. Any argument that moves from animal behaviour to human behaviour must assume some similarity in the effect of the key factor, which here is nutrition, on both species.

Final Answer:
Only a follows.