<p>i put histrionic. i do remember the sentence being almost exactly what caulfield1 said</p>
<p>Cohesive is incorrect. I didn’t even know what laconic meant, but it was easy to figure out using process of elimination. Cohesive has nothing to do with the expansiveness (or lack thereof) of a report. All they wanted was a word that signified that the astronauts’ reports were not very detailed - laconic was the only one that fit.</p>
<p>I put cohesive, but for the wrong reasoning. 
but I was pretty sure laconic was wrong…:/</p>
<p>hmph. a couple people seem to have put histrionic as well … but doesn’t histrionic mean really exaggerated in respect to emotion? i thought that word only works with people (?) asdlfkjasd;lf</p>
<p>@skylimits what do you mean they wanted a word that meant “not very detailed.” It very clearly said “X is rarely expansive (in other words, X is pretty short and needs more), while on the other hand Y is always ______ ( so they are asking for the opposite of what x is, aka expansive)”
Therefore, How the heck is the answer laconic? That makes NO SENSE</p>
<p>Yeah I thought histrionic was like overly dramatic…like relating to theater (that’s what my WordSmart said) so I crossed that out.</p>
<p>Histrionic is like dramaness, acting up… Why would they be melodramatic if they were reporting back info about the moon, sounds like they weren’t being very professional. Laconic is brief and concise, it totally makes sense that they were laconic. I mean it doesn’t help to say too much unimportant that they see on the moon, just brief reports that are needed.</p>
<p>I love the way people change their perceptions to be right. Not to be mean, but it was definitely laconic. I laughed at how easy that one was in particular. “The scientists reports were expansive, on the contrary, they were laconic”. Histrionic means dramatic (as a person), cohesive means working well together. You guys might have been recalling the question wrong</p>
<p>If they are rarely expansive, then they must be brief, aka laconic. That’s how I remember it.</p>
<p>Someone can compile a list of all the answers :)?</p>
<p>YOU GUYS SUCK -.- </p>
<p>@divvy
RARELY expansive not EXPANSIVE. of course that would have been right, if it were worded like that. But i am recalling this exactly how it was. and it was “RARELY EXPANSIVE.” a;slkdjfa;slkdjfkadsjfkdsajf</p>
<p>@ericsnow Heh? it said rarely expansive … then ON THE CONTRARY … ______ thus it is not agreeing with rarely expansive.</p>
<p>You guys are rustling my jimmies.</p>
<p>GAHHHHH</p>
<p>The only thing to do is to wait until we see our scores…unfortunately</p>
<p>@divy1234
I am 100% positive the sentence said RARELY expansive so how can laconic can be used to describe the contrary of reports being rarely expansive?</p>
<p>So you are proposing that it was cohesive or histrionic? You sir suck.</p>
<p>How about you interpret that sentence: “the reports were rarely expansive, one the contrary, THEY were __________” laconic is correct</p>
<p>NO. it did not say the reports were rarely expansive</p>
<p>it said “the images/pictures were rarely expansive … on the contrary the reports were always _____”
Think about it . If you put laconic then you would be saying this:</p>
<p>“X was rarely expansive (in other words X was basically short) … on the contrary Y was always short” </p>
<p>Think about it. WHAT THE HECK MANG.</p>
<p>Rarely expansive = laconic. Not sure how this doesn’t make sense to you. Sorry, but laconic is certainly correct. None of the other words had ANYTHING to do with the brevity or expansiveness of a report.</p>
<p>And also, what worries me is that you didn’t even acknowledge your complete incorrectness in your first response in which you neglected the KEY word: “rarely”. Thus, you either brain-malfunctioned, or are trying to overlook that mistake which completely changes the interpretation.</p>
<p>damn it I honestly don’t even remember this question, and based on the fact that a lot of people are talking about it I’m assuming it was not EXP? damn</p>
<p>And even if you can convince yourself that laconic doesn’t fit, then how do you justify cohesive? Does cohesive have anything to do with the astronauts’ expansive or brief report?
…</p>