When you infer from data, you ...

• A. arrive at a conclusion from facts
• B. state a hypothesis without data
• C. derive a conclusion from evidence
• D. ignore the data

Answer: (C)

Inferring from data means using what you observe and reasoned connections in the evidence to draw a conclusion that goes beyond just restating the raw facts. It’s about taking the data as support and deciding what they imply about the question at hand. That’s why deriving a conclusion from evidence fits best: you start with the data, weigh patterns or relationships, and arrive at a conclusion that the data support, even if you can’t state it with absolute certainty. For example, if a study shows higher scores after a certain intervention, you infer that the intervention may be beneficial, while also noting any limits like sample size or other factors. The other options don’t capture this evidence-based reasoning: arriving at a conclusion from facts is close but less explicit about using evidence to infer something beyond simply listing facts; stating a hypothesis without data is proposing an explanation without evidence; ignoring the data is the opposite of inferring.