Count Dracula wanted to investigate the effect of removing a specific small part of the brain of a vampire bat to eliminate its insatiable thirst for human blood. He caught ten vampire bats and randomly assigned them to one of two groups. The groups were anesthetized and had holes surgically drilled into their skull. The Count then destroyed an area in the hypothalamus of the experimental bats' brain using a one-half-inch drill bit. The control group bats' brains were left intact. Two weeks later, after the bats had recovered, Dracula offered both groups some fresh human blood. His prediction was confirmed: The experimental bats refused to even taste the blood; whereas, the control bats slurped it up as greedily as before. An unexpected side effect was that the experimental bats no longer hibernated during the day; in fact, they seemed driven to "soak up rays" while the control bats slept. Dracula was elated and he concluded his operation was a success. Then, he arranged for a Transylvanian doctor to perform the same procedure confident that he could be "cured" as a vampire and could return to his "former" less sparkly self (Robert Pattinson).Are the researcher's conclusions warranted (yes/no)? Name the independent variable(s):Name the dependent variable(s):Name the confounded variable(s):What is one method to "unconfound" the experiment?