Suppose that an animal behaviorist is concerned about the effects of a nearby freeway on the nesting behavior of an endangered bird. In this fictional study, suppose that nesting behavior is measured by counting the number of trips to the nest per hour for an individual bird. The animal behaviorist compares a random sample of 40 birds nearby the freeway to a random sample of 40 birds in an undisturbed location. For 24 weeks, the animal behaviorist sets up cameras to count the number of trips to the nest per hour for each bird. At the end of the 24-week period, the animal behaviorist compares the mean number of trips to the nest per hour for the freeway location and the undisturbed location. The animal behaviorist is using a 5% significance level. The mean number of trips to the nest per hour is less for the birds at the freeway location. The differences are statistically significant at the 4% level. What conclusion can we draw from these results? Group of answer choices The animal behaviorist has proven that nearby freeways cause endangered birds to make less trips per hour to their nests. There is evidence that nearby freeways may contribute to a change in nesting behavior but the study design prohibits a cause-and-effect conclusion. The sample size is too small to draw a valid conclusion. There is a large difference in the counts of nesting trips for birds in the two groups.